OMB
Operations Management Board (OMB)
OMB aims to define policies needed to provide a reliable transparent infrastructure composed of multiple national infrastructure providers
- Terms of Reference (draft)
- Contact information: noc-managers at mailman dot egi dot eu
- Membership: NGI Operations Managers, EGI-InSPIRE SA1 task leaders, EGI.eu COO
- Agenda pages
- Documents from the EGI.eu Document DB
- OMB Actions at EGI.eu RT
October 2010
FOR APPROVAL at OMB 26 October 2010
Addition of CREAM Nagios results into the monthly site availability calculations
- Procedures
- Changes: Step to NGI to inform regional VO managers to change VO scope added; Changed in SAMAP's step: CE ROC to NGI_PL; Added step concerning creation of branch in dteam VO VOMS.
- Other
- APEL: modify the APEL-Synch tests to only check results for the last 13 months.
- Dear all,
- Since migrating the APEL tests from SAM to Nagios, there seems to be some confusion between the test result “CRITICAL” and what are critical tests.
- In the case of APEL, we provide two different tests, APEL-Pub and APEL-Sync. APEL-Pub is a critical test; APEL-Sync is not. However, sites will assume that when the APEL-Sync Nagios test is in a “CRITICAL” status, their site will have their availability/reliability affected.
- The problem in our case (the reason why more sites are failing the APEL-Sync test) is that this test is calculated by checking all the historical data of a site (currently since January 2008) both in the site’s local database and in the central database and raising an error if there are any synchronisation issues. This means that if a site has published correctly all their accounting data, except for some records in January 2008, their APEL-Sync Nagios test today will have a result of “CRITICAL”.
- We have two different proposals:
- Reduce the window to calculate the results of the APEL-Sync tests to 13 months only. Any unsynchronised data before that won’t result on an error.
- Remove the status “CRITICAL” for the APEL-Sync test and only return a “WARNING” if there are discrepancies.
- We have two different proposals:
- Cristina
OCTOBER 2010. NGI Operations Manager's Agenda
- Oct 6 (previous deadine has been anticipated): deadline for submitting your NGI deployment plan of regionalized tools.
- FOLLOWUP (19 Oct): deployment plans will be summarized in Milestone MS406
- Oct 11: deadline for submitting comments to the gLite 3.2 transition plan
- gLite Collaboration draft proposal
- critical issues preventing deployment of gLite 3.2 components need to be reported on RT
- FOLLOWUP (19 Oct): sent request of approval of the gLite 3.1 end of support draft calendar
- Oct 18: deadline for supplying requirements for ARC, gLite, UNICORE middleware (EMI project). Requirements are gathered on RT, ticket 331
- Oct 20: deadline for providing requirements for operational tools (EGI-InSPIRE JRA1). Feedback to the OTAG mailing list
- tool development roadmap
- EGI-TF tool roadmap session
- Oct 26: deadline for submitting second EGI-InSPIRE QR