Difference between revisions of "EGI-InSPIRE:MS108 broker"

From EGIWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with '{{Template:Assessment header}} {{Template:Notes To Contributors}} {{Template:Assessment_Template |O_Task_number = # |O_Task_name = Brokers network |O_Task_assessment = write her…')
 
Line 5: Line 5:
 
|O_Task_number = #
 
|O_Task_number = #
 
|O_Task_name = Brokers network
 
|O_Task_name = Brokers network
|O_Task_assessment = write here
+
|O_Task_assessment = From the last days of EGEE III project the monitoring infrastructure depended on a reliable message broker infrastructure. AUTH, SRCE and CERN are running the EGI production message broker network, which is composed of a fully connected mess of four brokers, geographically separated in three locations (Croatia, Greece and CERN). The operation of the broker network requires synchronized actions between the involved partners which is done via both a mailing list dedicated for this purpose and by IM (Jabber/gTalk) conference chats for instance. So far there are no managerial issues that need to be solved while the level of funding for the activity is sufficient compared to its workload.
|O_Task_score = write here
+
|O_Task_score = 4
|O_Task_howtoimprove = write here
+
|O_Task_howtoimprove = As initially requested by APEL accounting team, authentication and authorization mechanisms need to be improved to ensure that only registered consumers will receive their messages and no one else will be able to eaves drop or disturb the communications. This is already discussed with CERN as the EMI party responsible for broker software and is already in the plans for deployment during the next months.
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
}}
 
}}
 
<!--
 
Write the assessment in this way:
 
 
|O_Task_assessment = Assessment first paragraph, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
 
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
 
 
Assessment second paragraph, blah blah blah blah blah blah
 
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
 
-->
 

Revision as of 16:03, 11 March 2011


Notes to contributors

Assessment: (Provide an assessment of the delivery of services over the past year from a managerial perspective; highlight positive areas and areas for improvement; do not include future plans; text should be roughly 1-2 paragraphs)

Score: (assign a numerical score from 1 to 5 with a succinct explanation of what needs to be improved to increase your score – remove numerical description references upon completion) 1 = An unacceptable level of service was delivered

2 = A level of service that was below expectations was delivered

3 = An acceptable service level has been delivered

4 = A level of service that exceeded expectations was delivered, but there is scope for even further improvement

5 = An excellent service has been delivered that should be considered as best practice


Table 4: EGI Global task assessment:Brokers network
# Name Assessment Score How to Improve
# Brokers network From the last days of EGEE III project the monitoring infrastructure depended on a reliable message broker infrastructure. AUTH, SRCE and CERN are running the EGI production message broker network, which is composed of a fully connected mess of four brokers, geographically separated in three locations (Croatia, Greece and CERN). The operation of the broker network requires synchronized actions between the involved partners which is done via both a mailing list dedicated for this purpose and by IM (Jabber/gTalk) conference chats for instance. So far there are no managerial issues that need to be solved while the level of funding for the activity is sufficient compared to its workload. 4 As initially requested by APEL accounting team, authentication and authorization mechanisms need to be improved to ensure that only registered consumers will receive their messages and no one else will be able to eaves drop or disturb the communications. This is already discussed with CERN as the EMI party responsible for broker software and is already in the plans for deployment during the next months.