July 2014 - Admins - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

[JLSE-Admins] Fwd: Judi's account
by Allen, Benjamin S. 08 Jul '14

08 Jul '14

Ti, Can you take a look at this? Thanks, Ben Begin forwarded message: > From: Judicael Zounmevo <jzounmevo(a)anl.gov> > Subject: Re: [JLSE-Admins] Judi's account > Date: July 8, 2014 at 11:31:33 AM CDT > To: Kenneth Raffenetti <raffenet(a)mcs.anl.gov>, "Allen, Benjamin S." <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov>, "Yoshii, Kazutomo" <kazutomo(a)mcs.anl.gov> > Cc: "admins(a)jlse.anl.gov" <admins(a)jlse.anl.gov>, Kamil Iskra <iskra(a)mcs.anl.gov> > > Hello JLSE admins, > Is there a temporary solution for the login issue? For instance, can you manually append my public key to my authorized_keys? I cannot add the key via the web-based identity management interface because it tells me "[...] Unable to validate credential: Credential already assigned". As Ken mentioned last Friday, my MCS username (zounmevoj) is different from my ANL and JLSE username (jzounmevo); and that might be the issue. I can either send the public key or you can get it from my MCS account if that's possible. > Thanks, > Judi > > > On 07/03/2014 05:09 PM, Kenneth Raffenetti wrote: >> Right, but when he tried to add a key (same key already in his MCS account) he gets an error. >> >> I think Ti might need to tweak something on the backend. Judi's account (also: kiskra) have different usernames than their MCS accounts, which IIRC caused problems previously. >> >> Ken >> >

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Judi's account
by Judicael Zounmevo 08 Jul '14

08 Jul '14

Hello JLSE admins, Is there a temporary solution for the login issue? For instance, can you manually append my public key to my authorized_keys? I cannot add the key via the web-based identity management interface because it tells me "[...] Unable to validate credential: Credential already assigned". As Ken mentioned last Friday, my MCS username (zounmevoj) is different from my ANL and JLSE username (jzounmevo); and that might be the issue. I can either send the public key or you can get it from my MCS account if that's possible. Thanks, Judi On 07/03/2014 05:09 PM, Kenneth Raffenetti wrote: > Right, but when he tried to add a key (same key already in his MCS > account) he gets an error. > > I think Ti might need to tweak something on the backend. Judi's > account (also: kiskra) have different usernames than their MCS > accounts, which IIRC caused problems previously. > > Ken >

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Storage-aware Large-scale Data Transfers Testbed
by Jung, Eun Sung 08 Jul '14

08 Jul '14

Ok, thank you. -Eunsung On 7/8/14, 10:54 AM, "Allen, Benjamin S." <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> wrote: >Hi Eun Sung, > >> * Questions regarding the testbed for baseline testing. >> - Is there any additional node which can play a role of DTN except two 8 >> file-server nodes? > >In the proposed testbed no. Just to be clear I’m proposing 16 file >servers, split into two groups. The 16 file servers are backed by two DDN >S2A9900 racks of storage. The groups of 8 are to be defined by the file >servers connected to the same backing DDN S2A9900 > >The idea for the baseline testing would be to use one or more of the 8 >file servers from one group as clients across the network to the other >group of 8 file servers. Thus simulating DTNs accessing a shared >filesystem over a network. > >> - If so, all nodes including fs nodes and a DTN node share the same >> network? > >All 16 file servers will be on the same 10Gb Myrinet network. Each file >server will also have a 1GbE public interface, and a 1GbE internal >management interface. The same configuration as the Petrel testbed. > >The public interfaces will be heavily firewall’ed by default. We’ll >explicitly allow inbound and outbound traffic as requested. Ideally we >can get the list of firewall rules from Raj, Mike and you in by tomorrow. >If you only need standard GridFTP ports opened, please let us know that. > >> >> * Questions regarding the testbed for storage-aware large data transfers >> - Do you mean a single file server by a single file system? > >I mean a single shared filesystem (GPFS) across the 16 file servers. For >testing using GPFS’ data locality hints. > >> - Once a file system created, can we adjust the number of file servers >> later? For example, up to 32 servers, 2 servers per fs node. > >You will have 16 physical file servers. You’ll be able to reconfigure >them how you see fit within reason. This includes destroying and >recreating the GPFS if required. > >By default all 51 LUNs (8+2p RAID6 LUNs) per DDN S2A9900 rack are >presented to each of the 8 attached file servers via directly connected >DDR Infiniband. We can restrict or group which LUNs are presented to >which of the 8 file servers to force further data locality if you need to >simulate a less ideal storage configuration. > >Please let me know if you have further questions, > >Ben > > >> On 7/7/14, 11:44 PM, "Raj Kettimuthu" <kettimut(a)anl.gov> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Ben. This sounds good to me. >>> >>> Eunsung, >>> Do you have any concerns/questions? >>> >>> Raj >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:05 PM, "Allen, Benjamin S." >>>><bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Raj, >>>> >>>> To summarize the requirements for everyone CC¹ed your two objectives >>>> are: >>>> >>>> 1. Baseline testing a traditional DTN which accesses the shared >>>> filesystem over a network fabric, compared to a DTN directly on a >>>> storage controller. The JLSE file servers provide reasonably >>>>facsimiles >>>> for embedded storage controllers as they have a point-to-point DDR IB >>>> connection to the D2A9900 controllers. They¹re also lower powered >>>> servers so should simulate the lower resources available on an >>>>embedded >>>> storage controller virtual machine. >>>> >>>> 2. Storage-aware Large Data Transfers: Using data locality information >>>> from GPFS to direct GridFTP to the DTN which has local block access to >>>> the data. Thus allowing GridFTP to be more efficient in its use of the >>>> storage network (Myrinet in this case). A good analogy is Hadoop¹s >>>>HDFS, >>>> but for data transfer instead of compute. >>>> >>>> Please correct or expand the above as needed. >>>> >>>> Due to the Petrel testbed being setup as a single file system, and >>>> being a pseudo production testbed for Globus Share work (i.e. we can't >>>> just destroy the existing globus-fs0 and rebuild it), I think the best >>>> course of action to support the above work is to setup two 8 >>>>file-server >>>> filesystems on a new Myrinet fabric. We¹ll initially create a file >>>> system on one (or optionally both) sets of 8 file servers. This will >>>>let >>>> you use opposing file servers for the baseline testing across a >>>>network >>>> fabric. This testbed would be similar in specs (same hardware, same >>>> networking) as the Petrel testbed. >>>> >>>> Once that testing is complete, we will recreate the GPFS as a single >>>> file system so you can experiment with data locality. Without further >>>> configuration this will give you two silos of data locality (two >>>>S2A9900 >>>> racks). If you want to further worsen the test cases, we can limit >>>>which >>>> LUNs are presented to which file server, lowering the number of >>>> file-servers with block access to a given set of data. >>>> >>>> It looks like we could have this testbed put together by early next >>>> week, as we have a near ready set of 16 file servers available. I¹m >>>>also >>>> suggesting we use this new testbed as a more general resource for >>>>those >>>> that need GPFS but can withstand the file system being destroyed. I >>>> believe this fits Bill¹s project needs, and he has similar goals in >>>> testing data locality with GPFS. >>>> >>>> All, please let me know if you have any comments or concerns. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Ben >>>> >>>> >> >

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Storage-aware Large-scale Data Transfers Testbed
by Allen, Benjamin S. 08 Jul '14

08 Jul '14

Hi Eun Sung, > * Questions regarding the testbed for baseline testing. > - Is there any additional node which can play a role of DTN except two 8 > file-server nodes? In the proposed testbed no. Just to be clear I’m proposing 16 file servers, split into two groups. The 16 file servers are backed by two DDN S2A9900 racks of storage. The groups of 8 are to be defined by the file servers connected to the same backing DDN S2A9900 The idea for the baseline testing would be to use one or more of the 8 file servers from one group as clients across the network to the other group of 8 file servers. Thus simulating DTNs accessing a shared filesystem over a network. > - If so, all nodes including fs nodes and a DTN node share the same > network? All 16 file servers will be on the same 10Gb Myrinet network. Each file server will also have a 1GbE public interface, and a 1GbE internal management interface. The same configuration as the Petrel testbed. The public interfaces will be heavily firewall’ed by default. We’ll explicitly allow inbound and outbound traffic as requested. Ideally we can get the list of firewall rules from Raj, Mike and you in by tomorrow. If you only need standard GridFTP ports opened, please let us know that. > > * Questions regarding the testbed for storage-aware large data transfers > - Do you mean a single file server by a single file system? I mean a single shared filesystem (GPFS) across the 16 file servers. For testing using GPFS’ data locality hints. > - Once a file system created, can we adjust the number of file servers > later? For example, up to 32 servers, 2 servers per fs node. You will have 16 physical file servers. You’ll be able to reconfigure them how you see fit within reason. This includes destroying and recreating the GPFS if required. By default all 51 LUNs (8+2p RAID6 LUNs) per DDN S2A9900 rack are presented to each of the 8 attached file servers via directly connected DDR Infiniband. We can restrict or group which LUNs are presented to which of the 8 file servers to force further data locality if you need to simulate a less ideal storage configuration. Please let me know if you have further questions, Ben > On 7/7/14, 11:44 PM, "Raj Kettimuthu" <kettimut(a)anl.gov> wrote: > >> Thanks Ben. This sounds good to me. >> >> Eunsung, >> Do you have any concerns/questions? >> >> Raj >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:05 PM, "Allen, Benjamin S." <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Raj, >>> >>> To summarize the requirements for everyone CC¹ed your two objectives >>> are: >>> >>> 1. Baseline testing a traditional DTN which accesses the shared >>> filesystem over a network fabric, compared to a DTN directly on a >>> storage controller. The JLSE file servers provide reasonably facsimiles >>> for embedded storage controllers as they have a point-to-point DDR IB >>> connection to the D2A9900 controllers. They¹re also lower powered >>> servers so should simulate the lower resources available on an embedded >>> storage controller virtual machine. >>> >>> 2. Storage-aware Large Data Transfers: Using data locality information >>> from GPFS to direct GridFTP to the DTN which has local block access to >>> the data. Thus allowing GridFTP to be more efficient in its use of the >>> storage network (Myrinet in this case). A good analogy is Hadoop¹s HDFS, >>> but for data transfer instead of compute. >>> >>> Please correct or expand the above as needed. >>> >>> Due to the Petrel testbed being setup as a single file system, and >>> being a pseudo production testbed for Globus Share work (i.e. we can't >>> just destroy the existing globus-fs0 and rebuild it), I think the best >>> course of action to support the above work is to setup two 8 file-server >>> filesystems on a new Myrinet fabric. We¹ll initially create a file >>> system on one (or optionally both) sets of 8 file servers. This will let >>> you use opposing file servers for the baseline testing across a network >>> fabric. This testbed would be similar in specs (same hardware, same >>> networking) as the Petrel testbed. >>> >>> Once that testing is complete, we will recreate the GPFS as a single >>> file system so you can experiment with data locality. Without further >>> configuration this will give you two silos of data locality (two S2A9900 >>> racks). If you want to further worsen the test cases, we can limit which >>> LUNs are presented to which file server, lowering the number of >>> file-servers with block access to a given set of data. >>> >>> It looks like we could have this testbed put together by early next >>> week, as we have a near ready set of 16 file servers available. I¹m also >>> suggesting we use this new testbed as a more general resource for those >>> that need GPFS but can withstand the file system being destroyed. I >>> believe this fits Bill¹s project needs, and he has similar goals in >>> testing data locality with GPFS. >>> >>> All, please let me know if you have any comments or concerns. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ben >>> >>> >

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Storage-aware Large-scale Data Transfers Testbed
by Jung, Eun Sung 08 Jul '14

08 Jul '14

Hi Ben, In general, this looks fine to me, too. To confirm my understanding, I have several questions. * Questions regarding the testbed for baseline testing. - Is there any additional node which can play a role of DTN except two 8 file-server nodes? - If so, all nodes including fs nodes and a DTN node share the same network? * Questions regarding the testbed for storage-aware large data transfers - Do you mean a single file server by a single file system? - Once a file system created, can we adjust the number of file servers later? For example, up to 32 servers, 2 servers per fs node. Thank you, Eunsung On 7/7/14, 11:44 PM, "Raj Kettimuthu" <kettimut(a)anl.gov> wrote: >Thanks Ben. This sounds good to me. > >Eunsung, >Do you have any concerns/questions? > >Raj > >Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:05 PM, "Allen, Benjamin S." <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> >>wrote: >> >> Hi Raj, >> >> To summarize the requirements for everyone CC¹ed your two objectives >>are: >> >> 1. Baseline testing a traditional DTN which accesses the shared >>filesystem over a network fabric, compared to a DTN directly on a >>storage controller. The JLSE file servers provide reasonably facsimiles >>for embedded storage controllers as they have a point-to-point DDR IB >>connection to the D2A9900 controllers. They¹re also lower powered >>servers so should simulate the lower resources available on an embedded >>storage controller virtual machine. >> >> 2. Storage-aware Large Data Transfers: Using data locality information >>from GPFS to direct GridFTP to the DTN which has local block access to >>the data. Thus allowing GridFTP to be more efficient in its use of the >>storage network (Myrinet in this case). A good analogy is Hadoop¹s HDFS, >>but for data transfer instead of compute. >> >> Please correct or expand the above as needed. >> >> Due to the Petrel testbed being setup as a single file system, and >>being a pseudo production testbed for Globus Share work (i.e. we can't >>just destroy the existing globus-fs0 and rebuild it), I think the best >>course of action to support the above work is to setup two 8 file-server >>filesystems on a new Myrinet fabric. We¹ll initially create a file >>system on one (or optionally both) sets of 8 file servers. This will let >>you use opposing file servers for the baseline testing across a network >>fabric. This testbed would be similar in specs (same hardware, same >>networking) as the Petrel testbed. >> >> Once that testing is complete, we will recreate the GPFS as a single >>file system so you can experiment with data locality. Without further >>configuration this will give you two silos of data locality (two S2A9900 >>racks). If you want to further worsen the test cases, we can limit which >>LUNs are presented to which file server, lowering the number of >>file-servers with block access to a given set of data. >> >> It looks like we could have this testbed put together by early next >>week, as we have a near ready set of 16 file servers available. I¹m also >>suggesting we use this new testbed as a more general resource for those >>that need GPFS but can withstand the file system being destroyed. I >>believe this fits Bill¹s project needs, and he has similar goals in >>testing data locality with GPFS. >> >> All, please let me know if you have any comments or concerns. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ben >> >>

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Storage-aware Large-scale Data Transfers Testbed
by Raj Kettimuthu 07 Jul '14

07 Jul '14

Thanks Ben. This sounds good to me. Eunsung, Do you have any concerns/questions? Raj Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:05 PM, "Allen, Benjamin S." <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> wrote: > > Hi Raj, > > To summarize the requirements for everyone CC’ed your two objectives are: > > 1. Baseline testing a traditional DTN which accesses the shared filesystem over a network fabric, compared to a DTN directly on a storage controller. The JLSE file servers provide reasonably facsimiles for embedded storage controllers as they have a point-to-point DDR IB connection to the D2A9900 controllers. They’re also lower powered servers so should simulate the lower resources available on an embedded storage controller virtual machine. > > 2. Storage-aware Large Data Transfers: Using data locality information from GPFS to direct GridFTP to the DTN which has local block access to the data. Thus allowing GridFTP to be more efficient in its use of the storage network (Myrinet in this case). A good analogy is Hadoop’s HDFS, but for data transfer instead of compute. > > Please correct or expand the above as needed. > > Due to the Petrel testbed being setup as a single file system, and being a pseudo production testbed for Globus Share work (i.e. we can't just destroy the existing globus-fs0 and rebuild it), I think the best course of action to support the above work is to setup two 8 file-server filesystems on a new Myrinet fabric. We’ll initially create a file system on one (or optionally both) sets of 8 file servers. This will let you use opposing file servers for the baseline testing across a network fabric. This testbed would be similar in specs (same hardware, same networking) as the Petrel testbed. > > Once that testing is complete, we will recreate the GPFS as a single file system so you can experiment with data locality. Without further configuration this will give you two silos of data locality (two S2A9900 racks). If you want to further worsen the test cases, we can limit which LUNs are presented to which file server, lowering the number of file-servers with block access to a given set of data. > > It looks like we could have this testbed put together by early next week, as we have a near ready set of 16 file servers available. I’m also suggesting we use this new testbed as a more general resource for those that need GPFS but can withstand the file system being destroyed. I believe this fits Bill’s project needs, and he has similar goals in testing data locality with GPFS. > > All, please let me know if you have any comments or concerns. > > Thanks, > > Ben > >

1 0

[JLSE-Admins] Storage-aware Large-scale Data Transfers Testbed
by Allen, Benjamin S. 07 Jul '14

07 Jul '14

Hi Raj, To summarize the requirements for everyone CC’ed your two objectives are: 1. Baseline testing a traditional DTN which accesses the shared filesystem over a network fabric, compared to a DTN directly on a storage controller. The JLSE file servers provide reasonably facsimiles for embedded storage controllers as they have a point-to-point DDR IB connection to the D2A9900 controllers. They’re also lower powered servers so should simulate the lower resources available on an embedded storage controller virtual machine. 2. Storage-aware Large Data Transfers: Using data locality information from GPFS to direct GridFTP to the DTN which has local block access to the data. Thus allowing GridFTP to be more efficient in its use of the storage network (Myrinet in this case). A good analogy is Hadoop’s HDFS, but for data transfer instead of compute. Please correct or expand the above as needed. Due to the Petrel testbed being setup as a single file system, and being a pseudo production testbed for Globus Share work (i.e. we can't just destroy the existing globus-fs0 and rebuild it), I think the best course of action to support the above work is to setup two 8 file-server filesystems on a new Myrinet fabric. We’ll initially create a file system on one (or optionally both) sets of 8 file servers. This will let you use opposing file servers for the baseline testing across a network fabric. This testbed would be similar in specs (same hardware, same networking) as the Petrel testbed. Once that testing is complete, we will recreate the GPFS as a single file system so you can experiment with data locality. Without further configuration this will give you two silos of data locality (two S2A9900 racks). If you want to further worsen the test cases, we can limit which LUNs are presented to which file server, lowering the number of file-servers with block access to a given set of data. It looks like we could have this testbed put together by early next week, as we have a near ready set of 16 file servers available. I’m also suggesting we use this new testbed as a more general resource for those that need GPFS but can withstand the file system being destroyed. I believe this fits Bill’s project needs, and he has similar goals in testing data locality with GPFS. All, please let me know if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks, Ben

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Judi's account
by Kenneth Raffenetti 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

Right, but when he tried to add a key (same key already in his MCS account) he gets an error. I think Ti might need to tweak something on the backend. Judi's account (also: kiskra) have different usernames than their MCS accounts, which IIRC caused problems previously. Ken On 07/03/2014 04:54 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. wrote: > There is some replication delay, a few minutes maybe. However in this case the JLSE account has no SSH keys. > > Ben > > On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:52 PM, Kazutomo Yoshii <kazutomo(a)anl.gov> wrote: > >> >> Does it take some time to activate ssh keys? >> >> - kaz >> >> On 07/03/2014 04:48 PM, Kenneth Raffenetti wrote: >>> You would have provided a password at account request time that allows >>> access to https://accounts.jlse.anl.gov/. There is a password reset >>> link if you cannot get in. >>> >>> Additionally, any SSH keys from your MCS accounts should have been >>> activated on your JLSE account. Try ssh'ing to login.jlse.anl.gov and >>> see if that works. >>> >>> Ken >>> >>> On 07/03/2014 04:45 PM, Judicael Zounmevo wrote: >>>> Awesome! Thanks a lot. >>>> How can I load my public key to the account and get access? None of my >>>> MCS or ANL credentials are working on https://accounts.jlse.anl.gov/ >>>> Thanks, >>>> Judi >>>> >>>> On 07/03/2014 04:36 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. wrote: >>>>> Judi, >>>>> >>>>> I’ve activated your account. I’ve also added jzounmevo(a)anl.gov as your >>>>> primary email address for the account please feel free to update this. >>>>> >>>>> Ben >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It doesn’t appear anyone, hence the delay. I just added Rajeev as the >>>>>> sponsor. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ben >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:25 PM, Thakur, Rajeev <thakur(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Whom did he select as the account sponsor? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rajeev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Kazutomo Yoshii <kazutomo(a)anl.gov> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Judi requested his account a couple of weeks ago, but he didn't >>>>>>>> receive >>>>>>>> any response. >>>>>>>> Does anyone know the status? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - kaz >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Admins mailing list >>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Admins mailing list >>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >> >

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Judi's account
by Kazutomo Yoshii 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

On 07/03/2014 04:47 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. wrote: > The account name is jzounmevo, and the password you would have set when you signed up. The password is not shared with MCS or ANL. Let me know if you need the password reset. I changed my ANL password a couple of days ago (after my JLSE account was created). I can login accounts.jlse.anl.gov with my ANL password, so looks like the auth mechanism is synchronized with the ANL one. - kaz > > Ben > > On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Judicael Zounmevo <jzounmevo(a)anl.gov> wrote: > >> Awesome! Thanks a lot. >> How can I load my public key to the account and get access? None of my MCS or ANL credentials are working on https://accounts.jlse.anl.gov/ >> Thanks, >> Judi >> >> On 07/03/2014 04:36 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. wrote: >>> Judi, >>> >>> Iï¿½ve activated your account. Iï¿½ve also added jzounmevo(a)anl.gov as your primary email address for the account please feel free to update this. >>> >>> Ben >>> >>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> wrote: >>> >>>> It doesnï¿½t appear anyone, hence the delay. I just added Rajeev as the sponsor. >>>> >>>> Ben >>>> >>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:25 PM, Thakur, Rajeev <thakur(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Whom did he select as the account sponsor? >>>>> >>>>> Rajeev >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Kazutomo Yoshii <kazutomo(a)anl.gov> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Judi requested his account a couple of weeks ago, but he didn't receive >>>>>> any response. >>>>>> Does anyone know the status? >>>>>> >>>>>> - kaz >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Admins mailing list >>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins > _______________________________________________ > Admins mailing list > Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov > https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins

1 0

Re: [JLSE-Admins] Judi's account
by Allen, Benjamin S. 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

There is some replication delay, a few minutes maybe. However in this case the JLSE account has no SSH keys. Ben On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:52 PM, Kazutomo Yoshii <kazutomo(a)anl.gov> wrote: > > Does it take some time to activate ssh keys? > > - kaz > > On 07/03/2014 04:48 PM, Kenneth Raffenetti wrote: >> You would have provided a password at account request time that allows >> access to https://accounts.jlse.anl.gov/. There is a password reset >> link if you cannot get in. >> >> Additionally, any SSH keys from your MCS accounts should have been >> activated on your JLSE account. Try ssh'ing to login.jlse.anl.gov and >> see if that works. >> >> Ken >> >> On 07/03/2014 04:45 PM, Judicael Zounmevo wrote: >>> Awesome! Thanks a lot. >>> How can I load my public key to the account and get access? None of my >>> MCS or ANL credentials are working on https://accounts.jlse.anl.gov/ >>> Thanks, >>> Judi >>> >>> On 07/03/2014 04:36 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. wrote: >>>> Judi, >>>> >>>> I’ve activated your account. I’ve also added jzounmevo(a)anl.gov as your >>>> primary email address for the account please feel free to update this. >>>> >>>> Ben >>>> >>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Allen, Benjamin S. <bsallen(a)alcf.anl.gov> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It doesn’t appear anyone, hence the delay. I just added Rajeev as the >>>>> sponsor. >>>>> >>>>> Ben >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:25 PM, Thakur, Rajeev <thakur(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Whom did he select as the account sponsor? >>>>>> >>>>>> Rajeev >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Kazutomo Yoshii <kazutomo(a)anl.gov> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Judi requested his account a couple of weeks ago, but he didn't >>>>>>> receive >>>>>>> any response. >>>>>>> Does anyone know the status? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - kaz >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Admins mailing list >>>>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>>>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Admins mailing list >>> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >>> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >> _______________________________________________ >> Admins mailing list >> Admins(a)lists.jlse.anl.gov >> https://lists.jlse.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/admins >

1 0