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 meetings 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 (Scott Wells

Previously:

  • Previous discussion archived: SMT Meeting - September 27, 2018
  • (9/27) John confirming dates for the remainder of the year.
  • (9/27) Risk Review in two weeks.
  • (9/28) Proposed XSEDE2 reporting schedule reviewed by John and sent to the SMT for review and approval.
  • (10/11) Provide more time for completion & avoid conflicts. 
    • Will require an update to PEP. 
    • John has informed Bob that this is coming. 
    • IPR7 work will occur during SC18, but most of the difficulty will fall to John
  • (10/11) Decision to move forward with the proposed new schedule. 

Discussion:

  • Reminder that IPR7 commences on Nov. 1.
  • Changes to this IPR from previous ones include:
    • L2 sections should provide updates on any management changes (L2 director, L3 manager, PM change).
    • L2 section highlights that you want moved up to project level highlight, please highlight this in the template.  Ron will then pull from that for the project level highlights. High impact things. 

Decisions:

 

3. ER Update (Hannah Remmert

Previously:

  • (10/25) Added to agenda  

Discussion:

  • SC18 Booth
    • Postcards, flier, laptop stickers
    • Link to volunteer in the booth went out in Inside XSEDE. Please sign up. 
    • Campus Champions breakfast Tuesday morning
    • Discover More reception Wednesday afternoon.
    • Will send email next week announcing everything to users & external audience
  • Science Highlights Book
    • Went to printer last week. 
  • Photo Release Form 
    • Sparked by request to use photos from a training event.
    • If approved, will post to website and point people to use that if they plan to take photos.

Decisions:

  •  


4. XSEDE2 PEP Update (Ron Payne

Previously:

  • (10/16) Added to agenda 
  • (10/19) Proposed updates to PEP sent to SMT for review. Discussion and approval expected during 10/25 SMT call.

Discussion:

  • Leadership changes and other updates. 

Decisions:

  •  SMT votes to approve changes to the PEP. Changes will be posted to the wiki. 

 

5. XCI Updates (David Lifka / Craig Stewart

Previously:

  • (10/19) Added to agenda 

Discussion:

  • Discussion points:
  • Raise awareness of what is coming from XCI & ideas for making these capabilities successful. 
    • New and enhanced capabilities coming from XCI this program year
    • Community Software Repository (CSR) Redesign
      • Proposed new service name: Research Software Portal Provided by XSEDE
      • Who will rate software? 
        • Have to XSEDE identity & log in. Low barrier but will see how far that gets us
        • SPs & users can already rate software/services
      • Make site more useful, more modern look
      • Purchased theme with large graphical element, options for highlighting features. Options for subpages that we can use or build our own
      • Test bed set up so can plan out what we want to highlight. 
      • Each front page would link to secondary page with specific info, summarize capabilities & info available 
      • Feedback on layout:
        • Attractive layout
        • Will there be feedback from ER team on how it fits in with XSEDE messaging in general? Hannah: ER would love to provide input and work with this team
          • UAC happy to review it
          • PEARC19 presentation
          • If developed well enough, could highlight at next annual review\
      • Interesting to see if other orgs more distant from XSEDE could provide input on how it might be useful to them
        • ECSS has goal of reaching out to other orgs who offer advanced support. Could include this in those discussions. 
      • What demand have you seen for these services?  
        • Need to go out and ask how this is useful.  Not sure where biggest demand will be.  Champions could provide input
        • Make clear what is available on the Gateway. 
      • Could be beneficial to reviewers for allocations to see where software is available, alternatives. 
    • Extend virtual cluster toolkit to accept jobs from campus cluster partitions. 
    • Toolkit that will provide basic spec of hardware & documentation to do campus open stack clouds
    • Extending SSO to campuses
      • Have we solved duo licensing issue? 
      • Victor: Currently large number have signed up but haven't used in over a year.  Will purge them. Will need to monitor this.  Should be good for this program year. Could do contract for remaining period of time. 
      • Working on 2nd campus. After done with testing will open up to more campuses and we'll have to figure out how to predict/manage.  Too much demand might require pacing.  
      • Could do work to do federated duo. That is a technical solution to try to reduce number of licenses we have to buy. 
      • Do campuses come on because they don't 2-factor? In some cases that they don't have 2-factor, and that XSEDE can manage for them. 
      • Is this a service we need to charge for? Don't want to put the service at risk due to not having funds
      • Some could become rapidly dependent on this. 
      • Incremental licenses less than someone buying fewer?  Don't know.  Internet 2 had that type of license scheme.  But not currently at the count that we would benefit from that. Victor will check what those numbers are. 
      • Appears there are licenses that could be repurposed. Prioritization of licenses to use most effectively for the program. Individual monthly numbers don't represent actual usage overall.  
      • 20-25% have signed up but not using that we'll purge. Then will look at costs when we get over 5000 mark to try to anticipate costs. 
      • L3 SPs using these might need to recover costs.  Dollar/license/year? 
      • 1 of 2 products we gave IBC to look at and provide analysis.  Need to get them any pertinent info so they have accurate info for analysis. 
      • Have used PIF funds for additional duo licenses already. Happy to provide service, but need to do so at almost no cost to us, or cost recover.

Decisions:

  •  

 

6. Transition to AWS (Ron Payne

Previously:

  • (10/23) Added to agenda 

Discussion: 

  • Looking closer at billing/costs/budgeting.
  • Ron will follow up with details by email.  

Decisions:

  •  

 

7. XSEDE Federation Membership (Shawn Strande

Previously:

  • (10/24) Added to agenda. Email sent to SMT with proposed changes to the XSEDE Federation Membership.

Discussion:

  • Revise definition of L1 providers.
  • Review draft language
    • Refresh of 2014 version
    • Integration requirements to be added.
    • Requests out to L2s who would become L1s but haven't gotten a lot of feedback. 
    • Example scenario: Frontera system allocate time via XRAC–would go from L2 to L1.  
  • Will put in front of Forum but this is a Federation issue.  
  • Provides flexibility for not fully integrated L1s; loses requirements for some L1s to be fully integrated.  Don't want to lose that. If you're a Comet, expected to fully integrate. MRI awardee is not.  How to require full integration on the one side but provide option not to fully integrate for others? 
    • Can be addressed relatively easily. NSF mandates full integration. 
    • Table could be modified to get at this point. Don't want to provide loophole that allows anyone to avoid full integration
    • That is how NSF would tell an SP they don't have to fully integrate–tell them they're a L2. NSF should be able to specify if full integration is required. (ie, Stanford & LSU received guidance to integrate as a L2)
    • Say required unless waiver is granted. 
      • Say full integration expected unless the relevant agreement between NSF & SP specifies otherwise. 
    • Seems reasonable that a system allocate time through XRAC is as fully integrated as possible
  • Previous expected SPs to attend XSEDE conference. Appropriate to require L1s & L2s to attend PEARC? 
    • Probably best to state "recommended" for everyone. 
  • Want accountability for resource usage. 
  • Minimum bar for integration should be easy to achieve & useful. Don't want to lose the minimum bar.  
    • Someone has to tell XSEDE what they're integrating.  
  • Menu of other things you can choose to do (federate but not allocate, etc.)
  • Shawn will bring this back to the SMT after all of these issues are ironed out. 

Decisions:

 

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) - 
  • CEE (Maytal) - 
    • UII team will start round of reviewing website pages & getting sign-offs. Watch for this email in the next week or two, double check your pages, and respond ASAP. 
  • SP Forum (Shawn/Jonathon) -
  • UAC (Emre) - 
  • PM&R (Scott) - 
  • NSF (Bob C) - 

Next Meeting: 

  • SMT - November 8, 2018

 

  • No labels