NGI International Task Review MS124 Switzerland

From EGIWiki
Revision as of 12:35, 14 February 2013 by Smaffiol (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


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).


Community Engagement


EGI-InSPIRE Task Task Name Assessment Score How to Improve After EGI-InSPIRE**
*NA2U.2E Marketing
your assessment here your score here how to improve N/A
NA2.1N NGI International Liaison
Average 3 Focus on fewer key communities and adapt the infrastructure to met their requirements
NA2.6N Distributed Competency Centre
Average 3 Have more focused activities with clear objectives aimed to extend the infrastructure to to better serve the key communities targeted by NA2.1 Will continue those activities that have a national impact

*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 Overall good, but difficult to guarantee x509 user certs + site security. Still ok given the low criticality of the infrastructure (as it is perceived from the outside?) 3 In the long term reduce x509 necessity? Move security procedures to VOs/local teams within the NGIs
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, which also provides some internal monitoring and quality assurance 5 Better and more efficient monitoring move monitoring to VOs, drop some unnecessary tasks

**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.