|
|
Line 8: |
Line 8: |
| | NGIInternationalLiaiso_AfterEGI-InSPIRE = | | | NGIInternationalLiaiso_AfterEGI-InSPIRE = |
|
| |
|
| | DistributedCompetencyCentre_Assessment = Overall good, mostly based on WLCG | | | DistributedCompetencyCentre_Assessment = your assessment here |
| | DistributedCompetencyCentre_Score = 4 | | | DistributedCompetencyCentre_Score = 0-5 |
| | DistributedCompetencyCentre_HowToImprove = reduce/optimize effort | | | DistributedCompetencyCentre_HowToImprove = how to improve |
| | DistributedCompetencyCentre_AfterEGI-InSPIRE = Can one provide the same service level with reduced funding/man power? WLCG will continue after the end of the project though | | | DistributedCompetencyCentre_AfterEGI-InSPIRE = |
|
| |
|
| | NGIActivityManagement_Assessment = Overall good | | | NGIActivityManagement_Assessment = Overall good |
In the table below, you should provide your self-assessment for the EGI-InSPIRE "NGI International Tasks" for milestone MS124 "NGI International Tasks Review"
For more information on how to complete the tables, read the dedicated Instructions Page
Notes:
- This milestone is an assessment of services from a managerial perspective and should be reported as an evaluation of the services (e.g. objectives being met; resources to effort; issues; suggested strategic changes).
- 'DO NOT' report what your NGI did for those tasks/services as this is covered by the Quarterly Reports.
- In order to edit this page, you need to log in with your EGI SSO account and click 'edit' on the tab (top of this page).
*Please provide your external assessment on the quality of the service, which is delivered as a Global Task (scores and feedback will be included as part of MS123 - Global Task Review).
**Please comment on the continuation or service impact at the end of EC funding regarding the EGI-InSPIRE task/service.
Operations
EGI-InSPIRE Task
|
Task Name
|
Assessment
|
Score
|
How to Improve
|
After EGI-InSPIRE**
|
SA1.1N
|
NGI Activity Management
|
Overall good
|
4
|
Funding concerns often dominate the management activities; no simple solution for that
|
Less focus on central operation/services
|
SA1.2N
|
A Secure Infrastructure
|
your assessment here
|
0-5
|
how to improve
|
|
SA1.3N
|
Service Deployment
|
Often important updates are delayed into UMD -> the repository might not be used after the end of the project. The Documentation is VERY POOR + yaim is going to bedeprecated (MAJOR problem)
|
2
|
simplify repository structure if possible, follow Linux distros procedures when possible. Consider dropping an official repository in case (e.g. with ARC)
|
several repo from the software providers, involve non HEP VOs for maintenance (difficult)-> cloud/VM templates better for certain use cases
|
SA1.4N
|
Infrastructure for Grid Management
|
Overall good, as mostly based on WLCG
|
4
|
involve non HEP VOs -> cloud solutions. WLCG can live without extra management
|
WLCG can live without extra management. Expand cloud solutions for non HEP users (from hep centered to non HEP centered?)
|
SA1.5N
|
Accounting
|
ARC accounting is still not fully integrated.
|
3
|
|
Difficult to maintain/improve after the end of the project
|
SA1.6N
|
Helpdesk Infrastructure
|
Overall good. The required effort seems however fairly high
|
4
|
Render more efficient (less manpower required) and involve non HEP VOs if possible
|
Difficult to maintain/improve after the end of the project-> VOs should take over this effort (non HEP VOs will face major problems)
|
SA1.7N
|
Support Teams
|
Overall good, but difficult to maintain after the end of the project
|
4
|
Allow 1 to 1 interaction (via chat/phone) with sys admins/users, when needed.
|
move this effort to the VOs when possible. Non HEP VOs will face major problems.
|
SA1.8N
|
Providing a Reliable Grid Infrastructure
|
Overall good, but mostly because based on WLCG
|
5
|
|
|
**Please comment on the continuation or service impact at the end of EC funding regarding the EGI-InSPIRE task/service. If you have no information you can leave this column blank.