Скачать презентацию Overview SPIRE project Looking at the feasibility Скачать презентацию Overview SPIRE project Looking at the feasibility

0e2bec109d51ef75d0389497bb9790e9.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 12

Overview • SPIRE project: Looking at the feasibility of P 2 P in UK Overview • SPIRE project: Looking at the feasibility of P 2 P in UK higher education • Focused on Penn States open source P 2 P system ‘Lion. Share’ which is a heavily modified version of the ‘Limewire’ project (released version 1. 0 end of Sept 05) • Major difference between normal P 2 P and Lion. Share is the inclusion of Authentication and Authorisation • P 2 P and Authentication +Authorisation is a complex mix

Lion. Share Features • Authentication and Authorization • Directory Integration • Verification of Sharer’s Lion. Share Features • Authentication and Authorization • Directory Integration • Verification of Sharer’s Identity • Access Control • Network File Storage and Sharing • Automated Metadata • Image Preview • Federated Repository Search • User Profile • Support for Multiple Metadata Schemas • Creative Commons Licensing

Protocols • Uses Gnutella for P 2 P • Uses HTTP to move files Protocols • Uses Gnutella for P 2 P • Uses HTTP to move files • Can search over repositories using ECL or OKI OSID • Chat via Jabber • Has bespoke protocol with SASL-CA

Main Ingredients for Lion. Share • The peer on your desktop (client and a Main Ingredients for Lion. Share • The peer on your desktop (client and a server) • SASL-CA server (to provide the peer with network certificates) • Directory service (LDAP or Active Directory (with Eduperson)) • Network Security (Kerberos) • Shibboleth 1. 3 (to control access to files)

Three Pronged Approach • Active Directory based install controlled by TALL for early adopter Three Pronged Approach • Active Directory based install controlled by TALL for early adopter community (broken) • Install linked into Oxford Universities central LDAP (finished) • Install linked to the SDSS text Shibboleth federation (ongoing) Next Step • Build simple version into Reload

Lion. Share in Reload Lion. Share in Reload

Informal to Formal: Tools • • • Within repositories: P 2 P, Wikis, Blogs Informal to Formal: Tools • • • Within repositories: P 2 P, Wikis, Blogs Description of specific technologies or a mode of use? Technologies that can be contributed to… Informal: Formal: • Wiki • Dspace • Blogs • E-prints • P 2 P • VLEs • Flickr • Institutional Websites • My Space • Del. ic. ious

Informal to Formal: Features Informal: Formal: • You won’t have to talk to a Informal to Formal: Features Informal: Formal: • You won’t have to talk to a lawyer • You might have to talk to a lawyer • Often ‘on the web’ • • Open remit, no heavily prescriptive ideology You may have to be a member of an institution • Maybe assessed • Not assessed • Clear ideology / structure • Not ‘officially’ published • • Casual approach to rights Collaboration is often indirect (holds objects) • Provided by employer • ‘Secure’ • Could be used for publication • • Collaboration is key (content is written ‘into’ the tool) Often a social network

Informal to Formal: Lion. Share Mapped Informal: Formal: • Informal and ‘open’ philosophy • Informal to Formal: Lion. Share Mapped Informal: Formal: • Informal and ‘open’ philosophy • Institutional sign-in • Not used formal publication • • Not assessed Can restrict access to selected objects • Not highly collaborative (indirect) • Provided by employer • Conscientious about rights

Informal to Formal: Publication Cycle Repo. MMan project Can these ideas be mapped against Informal to Formal: Publication Cycle Repo. MMan project Can these ideas be mapped against this principle?

Implications • Institutions should encourage the use of informal repositories • Institutions should suggest Implications • Institutions should encourage the use of informal repositories • Institutions should suggest a path (workflow) from informal to formal repositories without attempting to own the informal element • Once paths have been established issues of interoperability should be tackled • Institutions should not necessarily attempt to ‘own’ informal repositories • Institutions should find ways of building informal repository use into assessed / reward outcomes? • The data on informal repositories is relatively transient

Project Site http: //spire. conted. ox. ac. uk david. white@conted. ox. ac. uk http: Project Site http: //spire. conted. ox. ac. uk david. [email protected] ox. ac. uk http: //lionshare. its. psu. edu/main/