{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flux-framework/flux-core/issues/750","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flux-framework/flux-core","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flux-framework/flux-core/issues/750/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flux-framework/flux-core/issues/750/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flux-framework/flux-core/issues/750/events","html_url":"https://github.com/flux-framework/flux-core/issues/750","id":170542496,"number":750,"title":"capture IB topology aware scheduling use case details","user":{"login":"garlick","id":169947,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/169947?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick","html_url":"https://github.com/garlick","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/garlick/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-08-10T23:31:15Z","updated_at":"2016-08-10T23:31:15Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Tim Meier @meier asked about Flux's support for network topology aware scheduling.  He recently met with one of Abhinov's students (Jens?) who is attempting to alter IB routes on the fly to track running jobs scheduled by SLURM as part of his research.  Tim felt that a better approach would be to have the RM be smarter about placement up front, and keep the routes (relatively) static, which is I think in agreement with what we were considering.\r\n\r\nI know our [resource description language](https://github.com/flux-framework/rfc/blob/master/spec_4.adoc) (RDL) was designed from the outselt to represent a tree-topology network, although support for scheduling network as a resource remains a research topic at this point for us.\r\n\r\nTim pointed out that while routing tables are mostly static, at times they have to route around a bad link and so have to be monitored.  The subnet manager (SM) knows the routing topology at any given moment, and Tim maintains software that acts as intermediary between the SM and other entities that may need to track the routes.\r\n\r\nTim was interested in how Flux would interface with his software, and in general wanted to explore this use case in more detail to be sure we get this done, hence I wanted to create this issue and solicit comments from other project members and Tim to capture any details that might move this forward a bit.  Possibly we could follow this up with a meeting if that would be beneficial.\r\n\r\nFor starters, @meier would you mind providing a link to your software and if you have it, a link to Jens' work?  Also if you'd like to add to or correct anything above, please add your comments.  Perhaps others can explain in more detail how this would work in Flux as I know others have a deeper understanding of the plans in this space.\r\n"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"garlick"}}