Choose timezone
Your profile timezone:
Powered by Indico
v3.3.5
Zoom: 677 0597 8632 Passcode: 734077
https://uni-goettingen.zoom-x.de/j/67705978632?pwd=OXZIemxVaENkU05GVFF5VEdRV2RWQT09
- Besides the individual deliverables WP5 aims for a common approach for AUPs, resource access and presentation of services to the users. We have many different resources and different user groups to be admitted to those under different conditions. However, we should find a transparent organisation of the access to those resources, with a common denominator as large as possible.
- The fairshare of resource usage may also be discussed in this context.
- Disussion about meaning of deliverable 5.8 due in Dec 2023. We see it as a representation in WP5 for many services made accessible and connected in TA4 for example. It will contain several microservices by Dec 2023, e.g. the Multicloud-Resources by WWU (WP5.6) and work as a prototype where other services will be added later on.
Presentation by Baida Achkar about a first draft of AUPs for the Göttingen resources:
- Based on EGI AUPs with relatively much content and detail.
- Harry will upload a link to shorter example from AIP. To be discussed which level of detail we need for resources in PUNCH.
see on Intranet
- Large part of presented AUPs is rather general, reserving certain rights to the Admins and clarifying that resources provision is not guaranteed. This seems to be suitable for a PUNCH-wide common AUP part which does not need to be repeated for every resource. Other resource-specific AUPs will certainly be necessary in some cases.
- initial check / on-boarding meeting of applicant and provider is suggested. Will not be long-term maintaible but might be userful in the beginning to optimize documentation and AUPs. Could be made non-obligatory.
- Applicants would have to describe there envisaged usage, which then has to be approved -> Less specific AUPs needed but additional work for the approval process. Might be a solution for some resource providers.
- In general, service providers should make sure to prepare good documentation and FAQs in order to avoid necessity of in-person consultation. A general PUNCH-helpdesk seems to be useful and should be thought about in the future but is not forseen in the current proposal of the PUNCH project. In any case, we should try to have a central helpdesk rather than resource-specific helpdesks or onboarding-meetings.