Per-Entity Metadata Working Group

[IJ Kim <>]

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:27:19PM -0500, Scott Koranda wrote:
> > 
> > > 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.
> 
> IJ? 
> 
> Can you ask others in TSG?
> 

I had a chance to talk about it with Mike who is the director for TSG
and he was very supportive running it on a CDN if that's the
recommendation.

--IJ