TONY HEY ON THE NEED FOR WEB SERVICES STANDARDS

By By Tony Hey, Contributing Editor

January 10, 2005

The UK e-Science Initiative, which started in 2001, began by gaining some understanding of the problems of implementing distributed middleware services that crossed institutional boundaries by evaluating the then current NASA Information Power Grid software — which primarily consisted of the Globus Toolkit, Condor and the Storage Resource Broker packages. But even in 2001, it was clear that any future distributed middleware that wished to have support and tooling from the IT industry would have to be based on Web services. However, it is an unfortunate fact that, although the Web services movement is supported by all the IT companies, even at the end of 2004, this “grand project” is still very much “work in progress.” The presently accepted Web services certainly do not constitute a satisfactory basis to construct a robust, international Cyberinfrastructure — “e-Infrastructure” in Europe — on which to build novel and demanding e-Science and business applications.

This is a problem. Funding agencies in the United States, Europe and Asia are funding many hundreds of e-Science or “Grid” projects, all of which involve one or more forms of distributed data, computation and collaboration. In the United States alone, even in the absence of a long-delayedCyberinfrastructure initiative along the lines recommended by theAtkins Report, the NSF is funding over $400 million worth of “e-Science” projects per year. In the United Kingdom, with the present dollar exchange rate, the e-Science program amounts to some $500 million over five years. Germany and the Netherlands have just announced 90-million- and 50-million-Euro e-Science programs, respectively, and the European Commission have launched over 400 million Euros worth of new Grid projects. China and Japan also have ambitious and significant e-Science programs.

To underpin all of this activity we need a set of standard middleware services that enable the coordinated, collaborative use of distributed resources (computation, data sets, facilities). This set of middleware services — determined by the application requirements — is what I call the”Grid,” as a shorthand for distributed middleware infrastructure or Cyberinfrastructure, according to my definition. There is clearly awhole community of scientistsand engineers — in both academia and industry — all gearing up tomake scientific and commercial e-Science and Cyberinfrastructureapplications a reality. So what is the problem? The problem lies with the slow pace of the standards process and the ongoing Web services standards “wars.”

A quick aside on Web services. This is the distributed computing technology that the IT industry is trying to define to be the building blocks for building loosely-coupled, distributed applications, based on Service Oriented Architecture principles. Web services interact by exchanging messages in SOAP format while the contracts for the message exchanges that implement those interactions are described via WSDL and other metadata formats. When a SOAP message arrives at a Web service, it is first handled by the service's message processing logic which transforms network level SOAP messages into something more tangible for applications to deal with (such as domain-specific objects). Once the message has been consumed, its contents are then processed by the application logic, making use of the resources available to the service. Typically, some response is then generated which is fed back via one or more messages.

By encapsulating the internal resources within the service, and providing a layer of application logic between those resources and the consumers, the owners of the service are free to evolve its internal structure over time (for example to improve its performance or dependability), without making changes to the message exchange patterns that are used by existing service consumers. This encourages loose-coupling between consumers and service providers, which is important in inter-enterprise computing, as no one party is in complete control of all parts of the distributed application. However, loose-coupling does not mean that the functionality of applications is compromised, since the set of existing and emerging Web services specifications should allow distributed application builders to model complex interactions between services.

Web services specifications can be divided into two classes. Infrastructure specifications define generic aspects of services (or other specifications), e.g. WSDL, WS-Security and the proposed “Grid” service WSRF. High-level specifications define domain specific aspects of services, e.g. a data access and integration service specification. Policy also plays a key role in a service oriented architecture. While WSDL describes the functional characteristics of a Web service — such as operations supported, messages sent and consumed — the non-functional requirements associated with service invocation are also a very important aspect of Web services and service oriented architectures in general. WS-Policy and WS-PolicyAttachment describe a foundation policy framework within which the behaviors associated with a service — such as security, transactionality, reliability and so on — can be specified. Conceptually, WSDL and WS-Policy are peers in the Web services stack. Now read on …

By leveraging the developments in Web services technologies, Grid architects will be able to exploit the tools, documentation, educational materials, and experience from the Web services community when building applications, without having to create a parallel set of solutions. This will allow the Grid community to concentrate on building the higher-level services that are specific to the Grid application domain while the responsibility for the underlying infrastructure is left to IT industry. The software vendors will work on standardizing the Web services technologies, developing production-quality tooling, achieving wide adoption, testing for the interoperability of the implementations of those standards, educating developers, etc.

This all sounds very desirable and obvious. So, again, where is the problem? At this point in time there are a large number of industry-led standardization efforts, only some of which are being developed within an open standards organization. This makes it difficult for a user to identify those that have completed the standardization process, those that are proprietary standards or indeed those that may have little future in terms of broad acceptance. The sheer number of specifications and the mixed signals coming from industry due to competing specifications in similar areas can leave application architects with the impression that there is no single clear vision for Web services. Even where there is a clear need for a standard (e.g., workflow, security, transactions, notification), it is still taking a long time for a widely accepted one to emerge. Different sets of vendors are producing competing specifications and it will therefore take time to resolve the differences in a manner that is both technically and commercially acceptable.

The uncertainty that this range of specifications creates becomes a real problem for developers who must choose which specifications to use in their implementations. If a specification is chosen too early in its lifecycle, then developers may suffer from lack of tool support as well as instability due to changes incurred as the specification evolves through a standardization process. In the worst case, a specification may never be widely adopted, and so will over time wither and die, adversely impacting any services that chose to adopt it.

What can be done about this and who should take the lead? The “Men in Black” theory of standards suggests that a Web Service specification that is supported by both Microsoft and IBM is most likely to achieve widespread acceptance. Indeed, it was not so long ago that Bill Gates from Microsoft and Steve Mills from IBM shared a stage and gave guarantees that their implementations of Web services would interoperate with each other. The problem is that this agreement apparently does not extend to Web services for Grids. Examples of competing or overlapping specifications relevant to Grids are WS-Eventing, WS-Transfer, WS-Enumeration and WS-Management, supported by Microsoft and others; and WS-Notification, WS-ResourceFramework and WS-DistributedManagement, supported by IBM and their friends. The resolution is not so obvious — since both companies approach Web services from very different commercial perspectives. Microsoft is concerned with keeping Web Services as simple as possible and easy to implement efficiently on Intel architectures. By contrast, IBM is concerned with defining more sophisticated Web services that can be used to create robust applications for commercial data centers.

However, by not reaching some compromise, both Microsoft and IBM risk confusing and antagonizing their major commercial customers. At a recent meeting in Europe, I counted dozens of major companies involved in the latest set of European Grid projects — Atos Origin, DataMat, Telenor, EADS, ESI, MSC, BAESystems, Boeing, SAP, T-Systems, Daimler-Chrysler, Audi, GlaxoSmithKlein and BT, among others, as well as Microsoft and IBM. All of these are multi-national companies with multi-vendor IT systems and it makes no sense for Microsoft and IBM to continue to talk past each other about Grids. Agreement on these low level standards is a matter of urgency for the world-wide e-Science and Grid research and business community and needs some resolution as soon as possible. Only Microsoft and IBM can provide the necessary leadership and this is what they need to show now. Only when these Web services standards have been stabilized can the Global Grid Forum concentrate on defining and standardizing, where appropriate, the higher level services that will constitute the Open Grid Services Architecture.

Subscribe to HPCwire's Weekly Update!

Be the most informed person in the room! Stay ahead of the tech trends with industry updates delivered to you every week!

MLPerf Inference 4.0 Results Showcase GenAI; Nvidia Still Dominates

March 28, 2024

There were no startling surprises in the latest MLPerf Inference benchmark (4.0) results released yesterday. Two new workloads — Llama 2 and Stable Diffusion XL — were added to the benchmark suite as MLPerf continues Read more…

Q&A with Nvidia’s Chief of DGX Systems on the DGX-GB200 Rack-scale System

March 27, 2024

Pictures of Nvidia's new flagship mega-server, the DGX GB200, on the GTC show floor got favorable reactions on social media for the sheer amount of computing power it brings to artificial intelligence.  Nvidia's DGX Read more…

Call for Participation in Workshop on Potential NSF CISE Quantum Initiative

March 26, 2024

Editor’s Note: Next month there will be a workshop to discuss what a quantum initiative led by NSF’s Computer, Information Science and Engineering (CISE) directorate could entail. The details are posted below in a Ca Read more…

Waseda U. Researchers Reports New Quantum Algorithm for Speeding Optimization

March 25, 2024

Optimization problems cover a wide range of applications and are often cited as good candidates for quantum computing. However, the execution time for constrained combinatorial optimization applications on quantum device Read more…

NVLink: Faster Interconnects and Switches to Help Relieve Data Bottlenecks

March 25, 2024

Nvidia’s new Blackwell architecture may have stolen the show this week at the GPU Technology Conference in San Jose, California. But an emerging bottleneck at the network layer threatens to make bigger and brawnier pro Read more…

Who is David Blackwell?

March 22, 2024

During GTC24, co-founder and president of NVIDIA Jensen Huang unveiled the Blackwell GPU. This GPU itself is heavily optimized for AI work, boasting 192GB of HBM3E memory as well as the the ability to train 1 trillion pa Read more…

MLPerf Inference 4.0 Results Showcase GenAI; Nvidia Still Dominates

March 28, 2024

There were no startling surprises in the latest MLPerf Inference benchmark (4.0) results released yesterday. Two new workloads — Llama 2 and Stable Diffusion Read more…

Q&A with Nvidia’s Chief of DGX Systems on the DGX-GB200 Rack-scale System

March 27, 2024

Pictures of Nvidia's new flagship mega-server, the DGX GB200, on the GTC show floor got favorable reactions on social media for the sheer amount of computing po Read more…

NVLink: Faster Interconnects and Switches to Help Relieve Data Bottlenecks

March 25, 2024

Nvidia’s new Blackwell architecture may have stolen the show this week at the GPU Technology Conference in San Jose, California. But an emerging bottleneck at Read more…

Who is David Blackwell?

March 22, 2024

During GTC24, co-founder and president of NVIDIA Jensen Huang unveiled the Blackwell GPU. This GPU itself is heavily optimized for AI work, boasting 192GB of HB Read more…

Nvidia Looks to Accelerate GenAI Adoption with NIM

March 19, 2024

Today at the GPU Technology Conference, Nvidia launched a new offering aimed at helping customers quickly deploy their generative AI applications in a secure, s Read more…

The Generative AI Future Is Now, Nvidia’s Huang Says

March 19, 2024

We are in the early days of a transformative shift in how business gets done thanks to the advent of generative AI, according to Nvidia CEO and cofounder Jensen Read more…

Nvidia’s New Blackwell GPU Can Train AI Models with Trillions of Parameters

March 18, 2024

Nvidia's latest and fastest GPU, codenamed Blackwell, is here and will underpin the company's AI plans this year. The chip offers performance improvements from Read more…

Nvidia Showcases Quantum Cloud, Expanding Quantum Portfolio at GTC24

March 18, 2024

Nvidia’s barrage of quantum news at GTC24 this week includes new products, signature collaborations, and a new Nvidia Quantum Cloud for quantum developers. Wh Read more…

Alibaba Shuts Down its Quantum Computing Effort

November 30, 2023

In case you missed it, China’s e-commerce giant Alibaba has shut down its quantum computing research effort. It’s not entirely clear what drove the change. Read more…

Nvidia H100: Are 550,000 GPUs Enough for This Year?

August 17, 2023

The GPU Squeeze continues to place a premium on Nvidia H100 GPUs. In a recent Financial Times article, Nvidia reports that it expects to ship 550,000 of its lat Read more…

Shutterstock 1285747942

AMD’s Horsepower-packed MI300X GPU Beats Nvidia’s Upcoming H200

December 7, 2023

AMD and Nvidia are locked in an AI performance battle – much like the gaming GPU performance clash the companies have waged for decades. AMD has claimed it Read more…

DoD Takes a Long View of Quantum Computing

December 19, 2023

Given the large sums tied to expensive weapon systems – think $100-million-plus per F-35 fighter – it’s easy to forget the U.S. Department of Defense is a Read more…

Synopsys Eats Ansys: Does HPC Get Indigestion?

February 8, 2024

Recently, it was announced that Synopsys is buying HPC tool developer Ansys. Started in Pittsburgh, Pa., in 1970 as Swanson Analysis Systems, Inc. (SASI) by John Swanson (and eventually renamed), Ansys serves the CAE (Computer Aided Engineering)/multiphysics engineering simulation market. Read more…

Choosing the Right GPU for LLM Inference and Training

December 11, 2023

Accelerating the training and inference processes of deep learning models is crucial for unleashing their true potential and NVIDIA GPUs have emerged as a game- Read more…

Intel’s Server and PC Chip Development Will Blur After 2025

January 15, 2024

Intel's dealing with much more than chip rivals breathing down its neck; it is simultaneously integrating a bevy of new technologies such as chiplets, artificia Read more…

Baidu Exits Quantum, Closely Following Alibaba’s Earlier Move

January 5, 2024

Reuters reported this week that Baidu, China’s giant e-commerce and services provider, is exiting the quantum computing development arena. Reuters reported � Read more…

Leading Solution Providers

Contributors

Comparing NVIDIA A100 and NVIDIA L40S: Which GPU is Ideal for AI and Graphics-Intensive Workloads?

October 30, 2023

With long lead times for the NVIDIA H100 and A100 GPUs, many organizations are looking at the new NVIDIA L40S GPU, which it’s a new GPU optimized for AI and g Read more…

Shutterstock 1179408610

Google Addresses the Mysteries of Its Hypercomputer 

December 28, 2023

When Google launched its Hypercomputer earlier this month (December 2023), the first reaction was, "Say what?" It turns out that the Hypercomputer is Google's t Read more…

AMD MI3000A

How AMD May Get Across the CUDA Moat

October 5, 2023

When discussing GenAI, the term "GPU" almost always enters the conversation and the topic often moves toward performance and access. Interestingly, the word "GPU" is assumed to mean "Nvidia" products. (As an aside, the popular Nvidia hardware used in GenAI are not technically... Read more…

Shutterstock 1606064203

Meta’s Zuckerberg Puts Its AI Future in the Hands of 600,000 GPUs

January 25, 2024

In under two minutes, Meta's CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, laid out the company's AI plans, which included a plan to build an artificial intelligence system with the eq Read more…

Google Introduces ‘Hypercomputer’ to Its AI Infrastructure

December 11, 2023

Google ran out of monikers to describe its new AI system released on December 7. Supercomputer perhaps wasn't an apt description, so it settled on Hypercomputer Read more…

China Is All In on a RISC-V Future

January 8, 2024

The state of RISC-V in China was discussed in a recent report released by the Jamestown Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. The report, entitled "E Read more…

Intel Won’t Have a Xeon Max Chip with New Emerald Rapids CPU

December 14, 2023

As expected, Intel officially announced its 5th generation Xeon server chips codenamed Emerald Rapids at an event in New York City, where the focus was really o Read more…

IBM Quantum Summit: Two New QPUs, Upgraded Qiskit, 10-year Roadmap and More

December 4, 2023

IBM kicks off its annual Quantum Summit today and will announce a broad range of advances including its much-anticipated 1121-qubit Condor QPU, a smaller 133-qu Read more…

  • arrow
  • Click Here for More Headlines
  • arrow
HPCwire