Global Lambda Integrated Facility

Subject Re: Network Control Architecture
From Harvey Newman <Harvey.Newman@xxxxxxx>
Date Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:51:06 -0700

PerfSONAR is just beginning to develop a fraction of the services and functions
that MonALISA has had in operation for a long time.

It is also not obvious that PerfSONAR will engage a full time systems architect to try to reproduce the real-time services architecture with a sufficiently powerful multithreaded engine to schedule and drive the services, a fully distributed services
architecture that has no single point of failure, a mutually-aware set of
agents, a robust high - performance messaging infrstructure, etc. It would not be easy and it has rarely, if ever, been done before. In case how a fully fledged
PerfSONAR would compare to ML is a future consideration. It won't be
sufficiently function by the time the LHC is starting to do physics, by mid-2008. And ML will conitnue to advance and grapple with the real situation at the LHC.

PerfSONAR will not touch the end systems. ML does cover this aspect fully, as we need to distinguish end-system performance, load and configuration issues from network issues.

Since PerfSONAR is the agreed upon direction, and the services it fields will be relatively simple, we are sure we can interface to those and provide the interfaces
as needed. That is already the case for the PerfSONAR monitoring sone today.


Gigi Karmous-Edwards wrote:
Hi Harvey,

How does MonAlisa compare with the effort of PerfSONAR (



Gigi Karmous-Edwards
Principal Scientist
Advanced Technology Group
+1 919-248 -4121

Harvey Newman wrote:


We strongly recommend using MonALISA real-time, fully distributed services to do this. We need non-stop real-time operations that are proven to be robust and globally scalable, with no single point of failure. Also the intelligence in the agents both in the network and end-systems
allow us to understand what is going on, and take action end-to-end.
Hence our technology choices for US LHCNet and UltraLight.


PS ML is currently monitoring and updating > 1M parameters at 340 sites.

Gigi Karmous-Edwards wrote:

Dear All,

At the last GLIF control plane meeting in Minneapolis (meeting minutes will be sent tomorrow to the list) we had several discussions on interoperability between the different networks. We drew a diagram on the white board with input from the participants. The outcome was an action item on me to send out a high level functional diagram on the framework for interoperability (sorry for the delay). We expanded the notion of network resource in the control plane working group to include other resources as well, such as compute, storage, instruments, etc.

Enclosed are three very high level slides discussing the framework and the high level functional components included in a "Resource Broker " and a "Network Resource Manager". Several of you in the meeting had comments on the interfaces we need to standardize. I propose we start with the "Grid Network Interface" GNI, first.

We also agreed to work with both the GLIF community and standard bodies like OGF to develop these interfaces. I look forward to your comments.

Kind regards,