Per-Entity Metadata Working Group

[Nick Roy <>]

> On Aug 10, 2016, at 12:12 PM, Cantor, Scott 
> <>
>  wrote:
> 
>> I think there would have to be some real benefit (not just experience
>> gained) before we would consider doing that. From where I sit, the
>> current distribution method Just Works (TM) so I have to turn around
>> and ask InCommon deployers: Is there something about the current
>> distribution method that is suboptimal or not working for you (apart
>> from the size of the aggregate of course)?
> 
> I don't think the point was to help us (and nobody is suggesting the URL 
> would change), so if Ops doesn't think incorporating a cloud/CDN delivery 
> strategy under cover of a name controlled by InCommon is a useful step for 
> its own MDQ direction-setting, I don't think any of us would motivate it.

Well, I just found out from Tom last week that TSG is planning an upgrade to 
the Ann Arbor network, in part motivated by the "storm" of network traffic 
that our metadata updates cause when clients fetch a new aggregate each 
business day.  In that regard, trying out a CDN would probably help alleviate 
our demand on at least that one network.  It would also gain us operational 
experience working with a CDN service.  If I had my 'drothers, I would have 
two new ops staff already hired who would be part of this and gain 
operational knowledge from it.  I don't think that will happen until later 
this year or next, so if IJ and others in TSG think they might be able to get 
some useful experience out of this, and that it would help with the network 
issue or in other ways, I'd be in support.

Nick

> -- Scott
>