Venue membership via soap?

[Ivan R. Judson]

I have a lot of questions, but I'm definitely not opposed to the idea.

Questions:

1) Are you suggesting this for this cycle? We nominally froze code last
Friday (or were trying to) we really need to close this cycle asap to do any
real testing.

2) Is it true that heartbeats are the only event channel data (currently)
that are sent from client to server?  By moving this to SOAP are you
implying that services will do the same (I'm thinking a data storage service
that gets files dumped into it needs to indicate such a change to the
venue(s) it's present in). This looks like a general design suggestion that
the venue is the *only* source of event data, all data that results in event
generation is done via SOAP...

3) I would argue we *have* to do either the OpenSSL or unsecured SOAP to
make this feasible, a call every n seconds that takes ~1 second overhead is
the wrong performance ratio to be living with, when n < 100, IMHO. 

4) Do we know we can mix SOAP server/clients, GSI server, SSL client? If so
can we mix unsecured and use session headers to make it even faster?

5) What effect if any does this have on the potential design changes for the
event/text channels (merging them into a more basic communication channel
with a richer data protocol), since text is mostly client produced data, if
any server produced (this seems to be a direct counter example for moving
heartbeats if it's working, doesn't it?)

--Ivan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov 
> [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Robert Olson
> Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 12:45 PM
> To: Thomas D. Uram
> Cc: ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: Venue membership via soap?
> 
> I think it's a great idea. If there's concern over the GSI 
> connection overhead, we can do straight SSL with connection tokens.
> 
> --bob
> 
> On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, Thomas D. Uram wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Considering the difficulties we've had with the event 
> service, and the 
> > concerns people have about losing their membership in a venue (and 
> > having their media tools shutdown), I was wondering if we 
> should move 
> > membership management (i.e. heartbeats) over to the SOAP realm.
> > Especially considering that the SOAP server is now 
> multithreaded, this 
> > could be more reliable than the event channel, and would leave the 
> > event channel strictly to managing coherence.
> > 
> > This would simplify some services, too.  If they're not 
> concerned with 
> > coherence, they don't need an event client.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>