LCG LHC Computing Grid Project LCG and EGEE

LCG LHC Computing Grid Project - LCG and EGEE – Management Relationshop SC 2 – August 13 2003 Les Robertson – LCG Project Leader last update: 23/01/2022 09: 31 les robertson - cern-it 1 les. robertson@cern. ch

EGEE-LCG - history LCG § § § November, December – Several EGEE consultation/preparation meetings including HEP, national (including US) agencies (e. g. Berkeley, Washington, CERN 10/12, …). LCG gave specific input during this process. 22 February 2003 - EGEE “town meeting” with HEP 3 April - Technical Advisory Board proposals draft proposal 8 April – discussed in PEB 25 page “summary” prepared by EGEE for SC 2 9 April - Report by me to SC 2 10 April – I receive guidelines from SC 2 The management of the middleware work package should be assured by LCG personnel based at CERN The integration and validation of the middleware should be hosted at CERN, who should also host the management and a consistent fraction of the integration and validation team. LCG should have a prominent role in the EGEE operations and service provision. The support personnel for HEP applications should be based at CERN and be integral part of the LCG staff. last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 2

EGEE-LCG – history (ii) LCG § § § § § 23 April – EGEE Open meeting in B. 40 to discuss proposal and distribution of funding 29 April – report & discussion in PEB on the funding and management responsibilities 30 April – report by me to SC 2 on agreement on management framework, and the extent to which the guidelines had been achieved 6 May – EGEE proposal submitted to EU 1 July – EGEE meeting with reviewers in Bruxelles 4 July – report to PEB on status, including initial discussions on shared milestones 9 July – EGEE invited to discuss preparation of a contract meeting in Brussels on 24 July 25 July – draft of joint management proposal sent to PEB § Few reactions, mainly from US and EGEE 11 August – joint management proposal sent for ratification to SC 2 and EGEE Executive Committee last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 3

Proposed EGEE-LCG Management Relationship LCG § OPERATIONS § LCG operates the EGEE infrastructure as a service to EGEE. . For which it receives manpower …. . This ensures compatibility between the LCG and EGEE grids § In practice – ¨ The EGEE grid will grow out of LCG. ¨ LCG is (almost) a superset of the EGEE grid, at least in the medium term. § The LCG grid deployment manager serves also as the EGEE operations manager § The EGEE operations manager is responsible for the infrastructure AND for the “Regional Operations Centres” Pleas (ROC) e see the v ersio n dat ed 1 Augu st last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 4

LCG EGEE Operations Terminology Resource Centre Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Regional Support Centre Support for – Applications, Resource Centre Local Resource Centres Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Grid Server Nodes Regional Support Centre Support for – Applications, Local Resource Centres Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Grid Server Nodes Operations centre Grid Server Nodes Resource Centre Grid Server Nodes Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Resource Centre last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Grid Server Nodes Infrastructure Regional Support Centre Support for – Applications, Local Resource Centres Resource Centre Processors, disks, maybe mass storage Grid Server Nodes Resource Centre Processors, disks, maybe mass storage 5 Regional Support Centre Support for – Applications, Local Resource Centres

Proposed EGEE-LCG Management Relationship (i) LCG § OPERATIONS § LCG operates the EGEE infrastructure as a service to EGEE. . For which it receives manpower …. . And ensures compatibility between the LCG and EGEE grids § In practice – ¨ The EGEE grid will grow out of LCG. ¨ LCG is (almost) a superset of the EGEE grid, at least in the medium term. § The LCG grid deployment manager serves also as the EGEE operations manager § The EGEE operations manager is responsible for the infrastructure AND for the “Regional Operations Centres” (ROC) last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 6

Deployment LCG PEB EGEE PEB Grid Deployment Manager Operations Manager Re Ap po pro last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 ve rt r o p Re Grid Deployment Manager 7 t Re w e i v

Proposed EGEE-LCG Management Relationship (ii) LCG § last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 MIDDLEWARE § The EGEE middleware activity provides a middleware package satisfying a set of requirements agreed with LCG ¨ Based on HEPCAL II/ARDA ¨ …. and equivalent requirements from other sciences ¨ …. taking account of the reality of what is in our hands, what is likely to come soon from other projects (VDT/Globus), the people EGEE can expect to have work on it ¨ …. and the reality of what can be delivered in the next ~18 months § By middleware, we mean tools that provide functions – ¨ that are of general application. . ¨ …. and should not be developed by HEP ¨ that we can reasonably expect to come in the long term from public or commercial sources (cf internet protocols, unix, html) § The EGEE Middleware Manager serves also as the LCG Middleware (delivery) Manager § He therefore presents his work programme, agrees on his milestones, reports on his progress …. within the LCG project 8

Middleware LCG PEB EGEE PEB Middleware Manager Re Re vie po rt r o p Re w 9 e v o r p p A Middleware Manager last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 t

Grid Technology Strategy LCG § § 1. 2. 3. The GTA is an anomalous “area” as it does not have an operational role (remember the discussion when David Foster took over) The tasks are: a) Proposing strategy and policy for middleware acquisition b) Negotiating agreements on delivery of the agreed middleware c) Watching progress on development, signalling problems, proposing changes to the strategy d) Technology forward look – unconstrained by current suppliers These jobs must continue to be done, independently of the middleware suppliers But – 1. 2. My proposal is that the GTA functions are made formal responsibilities of the CTO 1. 2. 3. last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 David Foster has done a good job of sorting out (a) and (b) – and we now have a reasonable plan for the next couple of years (c) and (d) must continue to be done actively and independently of suppliers Several SC 2 members (and other people) had difficulty in understanding what the GTA was for It will be even harder to understand when there is also a middleware supply activity At present one person does both jobs 10

Proposed EGEE-LCG Management Relationship (iii) LCG § HEP APPLICATIONS § § § § last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 This is part of a more general Dissemination & Applications activity, led by the UK, with HEP the responsibility of CERN, and Bio-medics the responsibility of France The detailed management of this in EGEE is not yet sorted out, but it is agreed that the HEP work plan is agreed within the applications area of the LCG All of the HEP applications people will be based at CERN Proposal says that they do the sort of work done by the EDG loose cannons I believe that it is up to LCG to propose a more detailed work plan – do not over-define this – the current (Federico Carminati) text in the proposal is probably close to being enough for the contract There is a need for a line manager – responsible for reporting, finding matching funding, etc. -- as well as personnel management My proposal is that the four people work in the Applications Area of the project on a programme of work agreed by the LCG (SC 2) with line management provided by EP/SFT Which would make it Torre’s job to agree on the final wording of the EU contract with the EGEE management 11

LCG How far have the guidelines been met? K The management of the middleware work package should be assured by LCG personnel based at CERN The integration and validation of the middleware should be hosted at CERN, who should also host the management and a consistent fraction of the integration and validation team LCG should have a prominent role in the EGEE operations and service provision The support personnel for HEP applications should be based at CERN and be integral part of the LCG staff last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 12

Conclusions LCG § § § last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 The LCG project made known its concerns and preferred strategy for both middleware and operations of EGEE in both formal and informal contacts with EGEE from November last year LCG was invited to become an observer on the EGEE Executive Committee in December The EGEE project has taken account of the LCG concerns in their proposal The SC 2 guidelines for integration of EGEE and LCG management have largely been met The LCG project (PEB and SC 2) have been kept regularly informed of progress and difficulties 13

Conclusions (ii) LCG HOWEVER § Why do the experiments not react to information sent to the PEB through the PEB? (In contrast with the US representation on the PEB!) § How does a draft sent to the PEB get discussed first (in, I am told, extremely heated circumstances) in the SC 2? § Can the PEB work if only the computing coordinators are competent to speak for the experiments? § Do you need / want a project leader? last update 23/01/2022 09: 31 14