Service Interfaces

This page summarizes the interfaces available for the gLite services and components, in terms of APIs (with different language bindings), Command Line Interfaces, WS interfaces, etc.

Security

Component	CLI	C/C++ API	Python API	Java API	WS
SLCS
gLExec
Argus Authorization Service
VOMS
VOMS-Admin

Notes:

1. SLCS client provides the slcs-init CLI.
2. Argus PAP provides the pap-admin CLI to manage it and a XACML web service interface.
3. Argus PDP provides a XACML web service interface.
4. Argus PEP provides the pepcli CLI, a C API client library and a Java API client library.
5. VOMS-Admin provides a WS interface which can be used to generate bindings for various languages.

Information and Monitoring

Component	CLI	C/C++ API	Python API	Java API	WS
R-GMA

Compute Element and Job Management

Component	CLI	C/C++ API	Python API	Java API	WS
CREAM
CEMon
WMS
LB

Notes:

1. CREAM CLI user guide
2. CREAM Java CLI documentation
3. CREAM C++ API documentation
4. CEMon CLI documentation
5. CEMon C++ API documentation
6. The CREAM and CEMon APIs are C++ only.
7. A Java-based CREAM CLI also exists.
8. The WMS APIs are autogenerated from the WSDL.
9. The WMS CLI is implemented on top of the C/C++ API but offers more functionality than the API (e.g. failover or configuration files).
10. The LB CLI allows only to log events. Essential queries for job status or logged events are available through the WMS CLI.
11. LB Java API is available starting from LB 2.1 (scheduled release March 2010)
12. LB daemons and public clients have man pages briefly describing usage

Storage Element and Data Management

Component	CLI	C/C++ API	Python API	Java API	WS
DPM/LFC
DPM/LFC				(4.)
GFAL					N/A (3.)
lcg_utils					N/A (3.)
FTS				(2.)

Notes:

1. The current DPM/LFC/GFAL/lcg_util Python APIs are very much C style (autogenerated by Swig). They will be replaced with a more Python friendly version. A preview is available at http://egee-jra1-data.web.cern.ch/egee-jra1-data/dpm-lfc-python2-preview/
2. FTS had Java and Perl client packages (slightly more than the autogenerated code from WSDL), however they were dropped for lack of interest. On the other hand there is an interest for a Python binding, so it will likely be provided in the future with a level of functionality similar to what is available in the CLI.
3. GFAL and lcg_utils are client side libraries, so it make no sense to talk about web service interfaces.
4. DPM/LFC and Java: there are external groups working on providing Java client libraries, such as g-Eclipse.
5. DPM and WS: DPM has SRM web service interface. There is no similar interface for LFC, however it might be developed on demand.

-- FrancescoGiacomini - 05 Jan 2009