DJRA1.3.2 – Security Area Work Plan and Status Report (M12)

Security Area Work Plan and Status Report: This deliverable contains the detailed work plan of the Security Services technical area compliant with the overall EMI Technical Development Plan. The plan is released early in the project life and updated every year including a status report on the achievements of the past 12 months compared to the planned objectives. This status report covers the current status and plans for the next years while the work plan at M36 will provide recommendations for further work.

This deliverable is an update of DJRA1.3.1 (M3)

Schedule

  • Author sends ToC to PEB 08-Apr
  • Author sends high quality complete WP-leader approved first draft of deliverable for review 18-May
  • Reviewers send comments on first draft 22-May
  • Author sends second draft for reviewers' acceptance 24-May
  • Reviewers acceptance of second draft or critical comments that must be addressed in the final draft 26-May
  • Author sends final draft to PO 27-May

JRA1 internal

  • 2011-04-06 - John provided TOC and initial draft based on previous deliverable
  • 2011-04-19 - Version 0.2 contains comments from Christoph, Krzysztof, Elisa, Vincenzo, Mischa. Waiting for Valery, ARC (Aleksandr?) Once these are received, I will ask for this section to be reviewed.
  • 05/05/11 All PTs have contributed plans. See table below.
  • 11/05/11 Sent the v0.5 version to Security Area for last comments.
  • 12/05/11 Sent request to PO for review to start.

  • 28/04/11 Section 3 of document sent for review.
  • A. Giesler accepted two-stage review.
  • Section 3 review expected 03/05
  • Technical objectives list finalized 02/05/11
  • 04/05/11 Replied to Andre's comments on Section 3.
  • 11/05/11 Document v0.5 ready for review once Gantt chart is put in.
  • 17/05/11 Received comments from Enol.
  • 17/05/11 Made corrections. Uploaded 0.5-1 version.

Work plans tracking

Product Team/Activity Received Comment In Document OK
gLite-security Yes / Done All in Yes / Done  
VOMS/VOMS-Admin Yes / Done Got both Yes / Done  
UNICORE Yes / Done OK Yes / Done Yes / Done
ARC Yes / Done Yes / Done Edited  
CESNET Yes / Done Maintenance only Yes / Done OK
Argus Yes / Done OK. With XACML Yes / Done    
UNICORE Yes / Done OK Yes / Done Should be OK
SAML Yes / Done Edited Yes / Done Still to be checked
XACML Yes / Done Yes / Done checked Yes / Done
Common AuthN libs Yes / Done Yes / Done checked Yes / Done
Common delegation Yes / Done Yes / Done Edited  
GSI Removal Yes / Done Vincenzo commented Yes / Done Yes / Done
AAI Yes / Done Edited Yes / Done  
Data Encryption/Anon Yes / Done   Yes / Done Yes / Done

Review Tracking

  • 08/04/11 ToC available for review
  • 15/04/11 ToC sent to reviewers for comments; deadline 19/04
  • 17/05/11 v0.5 sent to E.Fernandez, A. Giesler, PEB for review; deadline 20/05
  • Use pdf version of GANTT chart
  • 20/05/11 A. Giesler review received.
  • 20/05/11 Points addressed in AGs review. v0.6 uploaded with corrections.
  • 20/05/11 Enol will not add more review comments. Points addressed.
  • 20/05/11 v0.6 available for second round of review; deadline 24/05
  • 24/05/11 Added the relevant objective codes from DNA1.3.2. Still v0.6
  • Final call for critical comments by 25/05 noon.
  • Revision expected following 240511 PTB meeting.
  • 25/05/11 Request to change UNICORE PT names... from Morris via email (attached)
  • Reply... change which UNICORE names?
  • Received the table and made the changes. Still v0.6
  • PO to create final version based on v0.6, upload to CDS and submit to EC
  • Final pdfs (deliverable+gantt) uploaded to CDS
  • Warning, important PO observations and future work considerations
    040611: I did not find any harmonisation discussion, a mandatory topic for each year 2 objective. The word itself did not appear in the doc. Can you please let me know why this was excluded?
    050611: “There are cases where the schedule has fallen behind due to circumstances beyond the control of the Security Area groups or unforeseen extra work (e.g. release process).” This sounds a bit odd to me for two reasons. Certainly events beyond our control always happen, but one of the goal of management and coordination is also to try and predict them and find corrective actions when possible. The statement is too hard in my opinion, it was beyond our control, nothing we could do about it. This ignores work that certainly has been done to mitigate the issues. The other point is probably more important: the release process cannot be defined as “unforeseen extra work”! I would say that for some PTs in the Security Area complying with the planned Release Process policies was difficult and more effort than planned had to be dedicated to it. This statement should be revised before submitting, please.
    • 060611 Fixed (related to 2nd bullet). Twiki and CDS files updated.

Reviewers

GANTT work

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r71 < r70 < r69 < r68 < r67 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r71 - 2011-06-07 - unknown
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    EMI All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright &© 2008-2020 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback