Skip to main content

Initial reflections on OGF20 / EGEE User Forum

So that was OGF20 and the 2nd EGEE User Forum. I was so busy there that I didn't have time or energy to blog. So much happened in such a short time that I'd have been hard put to keep up.

This turned out to be the best-attended GGF/OGF meeting ever, narrowly beating GGF5 (which was held in Edinburgh in 2002). We had over 900 people attend during the course of the week and a significant number stayed for all or most of the week. I haven't had feedback from all the sessions but I believe the workshops were well attended and I know the Grids Mean Business and the EGEE-specific sessions went very well.

A notable aspect of the week was the good interaction between the different communities. In particular, the colocation of the OGF and EGEE events has helped to show both sides where standards can apply or are needed. The commercial delegates helped to guide the requirements for standardisation work as well as sharing information on best practice. The exhibition space had a particularly good showing of EC-funded R&D projects as well as the EGEE demos, which certainly gave me a better picture of what these projects aim to achieve, in addition to stands from industry sponsors and UK e-Science.

Tony Hey and Peter Coveney gave stimulating keynote speeches, each worthy of its own blog entry. Mark Linesch, Ian Bird and Mario Campolargo gave overviews of OGF, EGEE and of the latest round of EU funding opportunities. Many other presentations raised interesting ideas and experiences. I was (of course) particularly pleased with the Grids Mean Business sessions, which were well attended and full of interested presentations, even though I say so myself. Gillian Law has written reports of these sessions which you can find on the Grid Computing Now! web site.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Presentation: Putting IT all together

This is a presentation I gave to an audience of University staff: 

In this seminar, I invite you to consider what the University’s online services would be like, if we worked together to design them from the perspective of the student or member of staff who will use them, instead of designing them around the organisational units that provide them. I’ll start with how the services might appear to that student or member of staff, then work back from there to show what this implies for how we work, how we manage our data, and how we integrate our IT systems. It might even lead to changes in our organisational structure.

Our online services make a vital and valued contribution to the work of our students and staff. I argue that with better integration, more consistent user interfaces, and shared data, this contribution could be significantly enhanced.

This practice is called “Enterprise Architecture”. I’ll describe how it consults multiple organisational units and defines a framework …

Service Excellence, Digital Transformation and Enterprise Architecture

Our University Secretary has sponsored a major review of the University’s administrative processes, coining the banner “Service Excellence”.  The aim is to look at the services we provide to staff and students with a fresh eye, making them more effective, more efficient, and focussed on the user rather than administrative convenience.

Our CIO is sponsoring a similar programme called “Digital Transformation”. This will replace old paper-based processes, starting with the question of what would processes look like if we designed them afresh for the modern connected world.  The aim is to make processes that are more focussed on the user and hence more effective and efficient.

Both of these ambitious programmes will need an effective enterprise architecture, if they are to succeed.  Digital Transformation is intrinsically about using opportunities provided by new technology to improve services and, as such, it requires effective technology services to make data available when needed, to pro…

Not so simple...

A common approach to explaining the benefits of Enterprise Architecture is to draw two diagrams: one that shows a complicated mess of interconnections, and one that shows a nicely layered set of blocks. Something like this one, which came from some consultants:


I've never felt entirely happy with this approach.  Yes, we do want to remove as much of the needless complexity and ad-hoc design that litters the existing architecture.  Yes, we do want to simplify the architecture and make it more consistent and intelligible.  But the simplicity of the block diagram shown here is unobtainable in the vast majority of real enterprises.  We have a mixture of in-house development and different third-party systems, some hosted in-house, some on cloud infrastructure and some accessed as software-as-a-service.  For all the talk of standards, vendors use different authentication systems, different integration systems, and different user interfaces.

So the simple block diagram is, basically, a l…