Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


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)


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


2. XSEDE2 Reporting (Leslie Froeschl


  • Previous discussion archived: SMT Meeting - December 19, 2019
  • (1/16) IPR11 compilation will begin on February 1. Email with instructions will be sent out in the next few days, and L2 PMs will be communicating with people in their area about pulling your section's part of the report together. Please be responsive and get your text in by the due date, and make sure staff in your area do the same. 
    • Risk review email was sent out earlier this week. Please be sure to review all risks assigned to you before the end of January. 
  • (1/30) IPR11 starts 2/1! PY10 plan info will come out late next week.




3. New NSF Service Provider Resources  (Victor Hazlewood) 


  • (12/19) Added to agenda.  
    • Need to get status/have discussion about how things are going on this call. 
    • Open Storage Network: initial kickoff meeting was Oct 31, meeting minutes sent out to all the affected XSEDE group for integration.  Victor following up with those XSEDE groups. Entry put in RDR for Open Storage Network
    • Stony Brook: had one initial call at the summer quarterly meeting. Victor following up with Robert to do an SP kickoff in Jan
    • U Del: Scheduling kickoff meeting in January.  Doodle poll already sent to them. 
    • Will drop off Bridges-2 and Expanse for detailed status since PSC and SDSC are plugged in so well to XSEDE.  (Ken at PSC and Bob at SDSC, for example)
  • (1/16) Darwin gave timeline of later summer for fall allocations. 
    • Dave H. hadn't heard of DISCO before. Related to Open Storage Network? 
      • Victor talked with them yesterday. MRI award that has already been awarded w/ stipulation that states they will be joining XSEDE. They still need to do XSEDE Federation application. 
      • Planning to pull team together for call after XSEDE Federation application letter is submitted
    • Cancer computer is not on the list. 
      • They still need to go through application process. Will be added once the XSEDE Federation application comes through. John will ping them re. status of their application letter.
    • Kickoff meeting with OSN was held. 
      • Need to get connected with allocations, XCI (Victor sent email to JP & Shava)
    • Kickoff meeting with U Delaware was held. Working to get that connected to allocations process by Oct. 2020 allocations cycle. 
    • Stony Brook has not been responsive to Victor so still working on that. 
  • Status of new SP resources:

    SP Resource




    NSF Award

    Target Date



    Bridges-2 press release

    Nick Nystrom


    Summer 2020



    Expanse press release

    Mike Norman


    Summer 2020


    U Delaware


    Rudi Eigenmann


    Summer 2020

    Open Storage Network

    Collaboration (5)

    Collaboration (5)


    Summer 2020


    SUNY at Stony Brook

    Ookami press release

    Robert Harrison


    Summer 2020


    Johns Hopkins Univ

    DISCO news item

    Dennice Gayme




  • (1/30): sent 3 emails to Robert Harrison/Stony Brook that haven't been returned. If he doesn't respond soon will be looking for suggestions. John can reach out if they don't respond. 
  • Open Storage Network: They haven't connected with RAS so asked them to do that. Would be helpful to talk to Jim Glasgow (NCSA) about this to prod him to respond. 
  • U Del: Kickoff meeting was held & minutes sent out. They want to say they've made significant progress getting connected to allocations by summer time for late Aug/early Sept XRAC meeting. 
  • Johns Hopkins: waiting for Gayme to submit XSEDE Federation membership. 


4. Licensing for XSEDE software (David Hart) 


  • (6/20) Added to agenda.  
  • (6/20) Email from Dave H: 
  • I checked the current XSEDE github repo ( and XCI has been applying the MIT license (which appears to be a reasonable choice per Dan, Svetlana and others), but with copyright assigned to XSEDE (which I believe isn't appropriate).
  • The last email from Svetlana follows.

  • I think we need to codify XSEDE's licensing approach and apply it consistently. This would be good to have decided before we start implementing a future "transition plan".

  • (7/18) Tabling this topic until the next call.
  • (8/15) Need to be discussed separately, legal guidance starts with Illinois, do developers have an opinion whether this is the right license? Need to create a new policy. Dave will follow up with Ron on the next steps.
  • (10/10) Dave sent Ron the info. Ron is trying to find someone at NCSA to help with this and then will have a call with that person and Dave to move this forward. 
  • (10/24) Proceed with recommendation to pursue copyright by UIUC as rep of XSEDE project with partners listed. Ron sent this to campus for feedback on copyright. Waiting for response. Software will all be open source. Ron is checking cooperative agreement to be sure copyrights aren't listed.
    • Dave is looking at the licensing side of things. Dave reached out to local legal counsel for options. 
  • (11/7) Ron & Dave met with UIUC person about copyright. Legal has now been contacted and provided a suggested wording that they're sending to us. They have to go through cooperative agreements for all subs from both XSEDE1 and 2 so this is taking a little time. Hope to have final guidance by next week to send to everyone. 
  • Choosing which open source license will be the next issue. 
  • (12/19) Language has been recommended by UIUC legal. Need to formalize what this means for developers. Question still outstanding re. language being adapted to different open source license. Can move forward with current need once we translate legal guidance into steps developers should take. Will coordinate with JP & others on this. 
  • (1/16) Waiting for response to followup question. Dave & Ron to followup. 


  • Got clarification from UIUC legal. Had conversation with JP. JP taking first stab at putting together guidance for developers re. how to use XSEDE code–when applicable & when not. 


5. XDCDB and production server access policy (David Hart  ) 


  • (12/19) Added to agenda: SMT Meeting - December 19, 2019.  
    • Following the recent XDCDB security incident, we closed/inactivated a number of XDCDB roles, and we are now fielding requests from users to turn some of them back on. We want to clarify the XSEDE approach (if not formal policy) for responding to such requests consistently.

      Ops & RAS will: 

      • Assess all accounts (Victor will help)
      • Notify people & collect info & put into buckets of staff, SPs, etc.
      • Suggest policy for governing these things
  • (1/16) Working through roles on XDCDB that have access to database & closing out some. Don't know where some came from so may shut those off and see if anyone complains. Not terminating any accounts that have been used in last month. 
    • Victor still working on drafting a policy.
    • Some people only access to get data for IPR. Should they email to get access? In those cases those people have not been removed. Susan still has access.  


  • Went through all XDCDB roles. Inactivated a bunch & no one has complained. Done with cleanup. 
  • Victor working on drafting a policy. 
  • Identified a couple odd SP cases & need to clarify policy on SPs having access to the database. Security is looking at this and updating the enterprise services standard doc. Adding how to request & be granted roles in the database. 
    • Main question is do we have official ways for SPs to get access to the database? Do we allow them to have access to all/part of database? They have home-grown capabilities that are questionable. 
    • Concern about people making mistakes that have impact on operation of XSEDE. Mostly locked down to read access.
    • One SP pinging database for user info. They should already have this info. 
    • Don't want to break processes for SPs
    • Baseline security standard in doc to specify how you request & approve roles. Maybe need to go back and look at roles and people have to specify why they're requesting it. 
    • Have to support things that we didn't build /design system for. Don't want to unintentionally break things for SPs if we change something. Don't want to be stuck supporting legacy feature for SP. These are unofficial side things the SPs do. 
      • Review problem issues or review every role? 
      • Are we required to support unofficial integration mechanisms? At what level can we say change this because we're no longer supporting?
      • Creates dependency that we need to support for others. Prefer formal mechanism that we can support. Not clear if those making use of info should have access to that info. Are they XSEDE staff? Who are they sharing the info with? Nice to have someone document the use cases & see if it violates any issues. If they're not doing anything wrong, determine obligation to support going forward. 
      • TACC script was doing 72K logins/month to look up info about a user that he should already have. Figure out what he needs and how we can get him the info. Shouldn't let anyone do any craziness. Another issue with Jetstream. 
      • Like to say as a rule we generally don't do this. 
    • Unintended uses vs. privacy issue. 
    • Rather document use cases and we evaluate as we normally would. 
    • Can come up with specs re. roles & how to access. 
      • Final approval by Dave & Greg. 
      • If they go beyond our privacy policy then that would need to be evaluated
    • They could pull info from XDMoD 


David Hart will follow up and get more details. 

6. Update on PRACE-RIST-XSEDE allocations process. (Ron Payne ) 


  • (10/24) Added to agenda.  
    • Agreement to use XRAS for any allocations requests for partnership
    • Detailed info being collected from PRACE & RIST to finalize & configure tool the proper way, get resources into RDR, etc. Need to know who at PRACE & RIST are the contact people who can respond quickly
    • John talked to SP Forum & XSEDE service providers about being involved in partnership.
    • Finalizing call itself to go out. All 3 groups have reviewed & approved. 
    • PRACE & RIST users can submit as guest or with a portal account. (Will not have to set up a portal account.)
  • (11/7) 
    • Ron met with Ken & Ester. XRAS instance has been set up & needs to be populated. Need info from PRACE and RIST to get the tool up and going still. Meeting at SC with PRACE/RIST folks to sort out final details. 
    • John discussed with SPF. Will follow up with allocated SP PIs. If this moves forward, in a year or so may do more substantial allocations. Need to make sure we don't violate any terms in their cooperative agreements with NSF. 
    • Finalizing call–should go out on Monday. Dates/template need to be reviewed by Dave (John forwarding to him today). Ron to follow up with ER so we can push this out once call is ready
  • (12/19)
    • No computing resources that need to be put into RDR for RIST as they're only providing support. 
    • Waiting for PRACE resource info. 
    • Deadline is in December. Will this be extended? John is asking this question because we don't have full info. If the decision is to extend deadline, let Dave know.
  • (1/16) 1 submission from last month's call. There were some questions that we need more info from submitter. Discussing possible reasons for low number. 
    • Next call will open early March/close end of March. Will review in April with award allocations starting in mid-May. Will need XRAS instance for this. 
      • Working with PRACE to get resources into XRAS. Working to get PRACE & RIST reviewers set up in system so they can review. 
      Identified where we've had some missteps. ACTION Ron Payne Ron, Dave, Ken, Phil, Bob, John to discuss this to make sure we're getting things done in a timely manner.Suggestion: make continuous opportunity/always open instead of having deadlines. Could still promote at certain times. 
      • Some timing/alignment issues with Japanese but will talk about this as an option.     


  • 5 systems now set up in RDR for PRACE instances & being pulled by XRAS. Nothing from RIST yet. 
  • Another call going out in early March, closing end of March, allocations start mid-May.
  • Progress of talking to XSEDE SPs w/ allocatable resources about this partnership? John has talked to SP Forum but hasn't followed up with individual SPs. 
  • Have gotten review panelist names from RIST.  Waiting for those from PRACE. 
  • One submission from last open call. Some details requested. Response to that now being reviewed. Allocation is for startup on PRACE machine. 


7. Interconnections diagrams (create 2) (John Towns ) 


  • (12/19) Added to agenda.  
  • (1/16) How to better articulate to review panel exactly how interdependent parts of XSEDE are. Tried to compartmentalize things but makes it harder to see interdependencies. Want to articulate in clear & consistent way. Help inform NSF about some of the complexities that aren't evident to them when they're developing solicitation. If they create multiple award scenario will create some dependencies across different project. 
    • Value in having different L2 areas represent in similar way
    • Dave: take all stakeholders into account
    • Bob: focused on interconnections between L2sACTION Ron Payne John & Ron to discuss off-line. 
  • (1/30) Defer to next meeting.



7. PIF Submission Review: Integrate  online textbook exercises with CCRS toolkit (Ron Payne ) 


  • (1/16) Added to agenda.  
  • Integrate the online textbook exercises with the CCRS toolkit (Details emailed to SMT 13-Jan 2020)(1/16) Despite current lack of funds, we should continue to accept submissions and put into priority list where ever we feel they fit. 
  • Phil: Nice project, but cost seems high. Moderate impact in terms of overall project. $100K to integrate with one class. Would this same cost be required for other classes? 
  • Bob: Lowers threshold for starting with parallel computing. Same concerns about cost & how that will be divided between sites. Why should this be funded separately instead of through CEE funds since this is within their scope? (John: assume this is outside their budget.)
  • Greg: Idea is good, but cost doesn't seem justified. More detail on cost would be helpful.
  • Dave H: 12 mos to complete. XSEDE could only take advantage for 8 mos. How would investment have long-term impact if we invest in it. More details of long-term implications would be helpful. 
  • Emre: Need detailed budget. Any attempt to integrate into CSRI toolkit? Where will this be hosted? If on Cornell, will they support this for expected class sizes? Any attempt to host this on XSEDE resources? Process is such that people propose an idea and get feedback about value of it and whether they should take next step and pull together more detail. Long term impact and whether the cost is only for one class would be good to get answered prior to making a decision. Ron Payneto share this back with submitter. 


  • Ron requested answers to the questions from Susan but no response. 
  • Clarification that PIF funds have been depleted, but are keeping window open in case more funds become available as a result of underspending in any areas of the project. Plan to have a prioritized list of PIFs in case funds do become available. Also possible that if we have the opportunity to propose a follow-on to XSEDE2 that these ideas could be included as part of that. 
    • Suggestion that this should be conveyed to all PIF proposers. 
    • Ron will let proposers know as well as include in staff newsletter and on wiki page. 


8. PIF Submission Review: Subscription to COmanage as part of CILogon service (Ron Payne ) 


  • (1/30) Added to agenda.  


  • To support use case prioritized recently by the UREP. This feature was not used in the past. Currently using the basic tier but want to upgrade to a higher/paid tier. 
  • How many people expected to use the new service? 
    • haven't done calculation. 3 stages to using this... starting more internally to help staff and then move out to all XSEDE allocated users. Users could make their own groups. 
    • One up-front cost per year. 
  • Not a lot of detail as to WHY we want this added service. 
    • Brought up through UREP. Needs were rated highly. 
  • Would be helpful to see use case that this came from. JP will send this to the SMT


9. PIF Submission Review: Password security for XSEDE users (Ron Payne ) 


  • (1/30) Added to agenda.  
  • Responses to questions that were submitted:
    • Was the UII team informed? From Alex: I’ve opened up discussion on this PIF with Maytal. The vast majority of coding work lies with the security team in the backend.  My guess is that the user portal team would possibly need to adjust error handling to accommodate this new condition if a user chooses a known bad password.  So we don’t expect a lot of development work on their end but we do need to coordinate with them.
    • Are there any other relevant databases besides the “have I been pwned” service? My interest is in covering as many compromised pw's as possible. From Alex: Yes, will develop this so allow the use of multiple databases and to account for the fact that these services may change, disappear, reappear, etc. over time.


  • Need more info on level of effort needed from UII. 
  • Service appears to be free. Will we pay for the service if we integrate with it? Building on someone's pet project? Relying on that service and it crashes? Are there other viable alternatives? 
  • Does their proposed budget cover all activity required by security & UII? 
  • Is this needed? Good to protect against bad passwords/enhance PW security. 
  • Will they be handling passwords in plain text or only encoded? Concern about additional exposure to user passwords. 
  • Abstract needs more details. 


Around the call up

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) - 
    • Working through blueprint response. Looking good. User engagement comments: a paragraph re. usability. Need paragraph re. accessibility for those with severe disabilities. Concern about access to resources we allocate. Issue that hasn't been well-addressed & should be on NSF's radar. Anyone have thoughts on this?
    • Making progress on backlog of recommendations. Appreciate efforts. Keep pushing on them!

  • CEE (Kelly) - 
    • Working on IPR11
    • Exhibiting at NSF sponsored conference: emerging researchers (student conf). If you have an RU that is open for application now, send to Linda to be included. About 2K students
    • Applications open for EMPOWER summer internships and the Advanced Computing for Social Change workshop at PEARC20. 
    • A lot of campus visits & training events happening. 
    • Change in leadership for CE: Marisa took a new position. Dana is the focal point for champions currently.
      • Tabitha is interested in this work if there is an opportunity. She expressed interest to Kelly & Dana but didn't hear back. Linda will follow up with Kelly & Dana about this.
    • UII: working on ORCID integration for publications in user portal; account creation refresh–will share when the doc is further along; exploring upgrading Liferay (ends in 2020)–looking at whether the free or paid version will meet needs
    • Julie met with CEE re. user survey. 

  • ECSS (Bob S/Phil/Sergiu) - 
    • ECSS all-hands meeting last week. Training on Jira & Confluence
    • ECSS papers for PEARC coming along. 
    • Benchmarking led by Jay Alameda. Want something ready by next allocations window. Need something in place so can start influencing next cycle.
    • Jay A is playing leadership role in IHPCSS–struggling for reviewers. Let Bob know if you're interested in doing this.
    • Working on quarterly reporting 

  • XCI (Dave L/Craig) - 
    • Have talked extensively with eval team re. how we calculate satisfaction metrics. Switching to using user survey completely for 2 new KPIs on user & SP satisfaction. 

    • ECSS & XCI launched campaign to look for software providers who would like help intergrating with XSEDE. Started with projects who received letter of support. 4 projects that look promising were invited to work with us to integrate new software & services into XSEDE environment. Had a call with one of the projects (Pegasus) this week to talk about how to better integrate. 

    • Looking at next round of projects: reaching out to all L3 SPs to ask them if they have software & services that would be interesting to better integrate with XSEDE environment. 

  • Ops (Greg/Victor) -  
    • IPR11
    • Working with Julie on user survey
    • Finished security incident doc. John reviewed. Sent to Bob–completed.
    • Provided Craig with info for ROI work
    • Added ticket bucket for Open storage network

  • RAS (Dave H/Ken) - 
    • Having conversations with NCSA re. new L3 for A3M. Nathan Tolbert is taking on this role effective immediately. 
    • Other hiring at NCSA & PSC should have RAS fully staffed.

  • Program Office (Ron/Leslie) - 
  • SP Forum (Ruth) -  unable to attend today

  • UAC (Emre) -  
    • Next meeting: John to provide update, Dave to talk about fields of science, XCI update

  • NSF (Bob C) - N/A

Next Meeting:     SMT - February 13, 2020 

  • No labels