perfsonar development work

[Jason Zurawski <>]

Hans Trompert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The last couple of days I've been working on setting up an environment 
> here at SURFnet to beta test our flowsub MP and flowsa MA. I was following 
> the Admin Guide (which by the way could use some reviewing before we 
> actually give this to end users) to setup the environment and was getting 
> strange errors. The good news for me is that most of my problems seem to 
> be related to the unavailability of the gLS infrastructure. The bad news 
> is that I really need the the gLS to make the beta tests useful. Is there 
> any indication on when the problems are going to be fixed?

The following gLSs from the list have been patched with a temporary fix 
until we can figure out what the problem is:

http://ndb1.internet2.edu:9991/perfSONAR_PS/services/gLS
http://perfmon-dc.internet2.edu:9991/perfSONAR_PS/services/gLS
http://ale.damsl.cis.udel.edu:9991/perfSONAR_PS/services/gLS

I expect the other gLSs to be updated in the next day when the 
maintainers get back to me about the status of applying the fix and 
restarting the services.

-jason


> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Michael Bischoff wrote:
>
> > > Hi Fausto, Michael, Szymon, et al.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:25 AM, Fausto Vetter wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Michael,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's really interesting. As far as I knew, from the beginning,
> > > > soapaction for perfsonar services should be left blank. The code you 
> > > > presented below seems
> > > > to expect anything ending with:
> > > >
> > > > message/
> > > Well, we have not changed the SOAP portion of our code in a very, very
> > > long time... And, this has worked up until very recently. I'd like to know if 
> > > there was a
> > > change in the Java client requests. Did you change SOAP libraries?
> > No, we didn't PerfsonarUI SOAP client bit is unchanged. As for LSClient API 
> > client bit it has
> > unchanged as well and was working well with the previous Gls deployment (all 
> > perl).
> >
> > > It is clear there is an interoperability issue here - but it is not
> > > something that is easy for us to fix for already deployed services. It is of 
> > > course something
> > > we can address in our next release. But - we need to come up with a way to 
> > > move to that
> > > without disabling existing deployments if we can.
> > >
> > > Perhaps one of you could look at a previous version of pS-UI and look
> > > at what it was sending before. We actually ran into this problem as well when 
> > > attempting to
> > > demonstrate pS-UI with some of our services yesterday and realized this was a 
> > > problem. pS-UI
> > > had always been able to access the Internet2 network SNMP-MA before, but that 
> > > was no longer
> > > the case.
> > As indicated above Ps-ui is unchanged, I suppose Nina can give the final 
> > confirmation.
> >
> > > Also, I believe this was working just last month when Szymon was
> > > testing the Java hLS with our gLS implementation. So, I suspect something 
> > > changed in your
> > > client libraries since then.
> > >
> > > > Jason, could you have a look on it?
> > > Jason, Aaron and I are in Austin at the SC08 conference, so you will
> > > not hear from us much (if at all) this week. (And, we are all on vacation 
> > > with the U.S.
> > > Thanksgiving holiday next week.)
> > >
> > >
> > > We can (and will) put something into our next release - likely in
> > > December. But, we have several deployments of the existing software
> > > (not run by us) and it will take a fair amount of time to convince
> > > other groups to upgrade.
> > >
> > > thanks, jeff
> > If all was unchanged(which is very likely to be true; considering version 
> > latest and the
> > version before that both contain the code.) then the only thing I can think 
> > off is that the
> > way it was being called has changed. I can't imagine anyone fiddling with the 
> > soap header's
> > afaik in Ps-ui. I can say with certainty that I'm not touching it in any way 
> > in the Ls
> > Client.
> >
> > Have perl services changed the way that they are started recently?
> >
> > I know to little about the perl implementation to say anything more sensible.
> >
> > It seems that in soap 1.2 there is no such header any more anyway.
> >
> > As a work around I suppose you can always add a filter that manipulates the 
> > header field.
> >
> > Will investigate further,
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Michael