[occi-wg] Resource Types: Compute / Network / Storage

[Krishna Sankar (ksankar)]

Going back, I think, first the Compute, Storage, Network should be under
infrastructure. The Platform comes next. There is something that the
PaaS provides more than IaaS and that need to go there. 

Cheers
<k/>

|-----Original Message-----
|From: Alexis Richardson [mailto:alexis.richardson at gmail.com]
|Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:43 AM
|To: Krishna Sankar (ksankar)
|Cc: Sam Johnston; occi-wg at ogf.org
|Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Resource Types: Compute / Network / Storage
|
|Ha, indeed :-)
|
|Standards don't need window dressing ...
|
|
|On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Krishna Sankar (ksankar)
|<ksankar at cisco.com> wrote:
|> And say "Cloud has no clothes" ;o)
|>
|> Cheers
|> <k/>
|> |-----Original Message-----
|> |From: Alexis Richardson [mailto:alexis.richardson at gmail.com]
|> |Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:39 AM
|> |To: Sam Johnston
|> |Cc: Krishna Sankar (ksankar); occi-wg at ogf.org
|> |Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Resource Types: Compute / Network / Storage
|> |
|> |Fabric is also used to refer to PaaS:
|> |http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/11/14/cloud-types/
|> |
|> |I suggest we drop the word 'fabric'.
|> |
|> |
|> |On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net> wrote:
|> |> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Krishna Sankar (ksankar)
|> |> <ksankar at cisco.com> wrote:
|> |>>
|> |>> But then SaaS is Software over PaaS; PaaS is fabric over IaaS;
|IaaS
|> |is
|> |>> compute, storage and network. Isn't fabric the P is PaaS ? and in
|> |IaaS, we
|> |>> see raw compute/storage/network ?
|> |>>
|> |>> If we want to maintain the Software-Platform-Infrastructure
|> |terminology
|> |>> hierarchy I am fine with that. Then we should switch the fabric
|and
|> |the
|> |>> Compute-Storage-Network.
|> |>
|> |> [Ab]use of the term "fabric" to refer to software platforms like
|> Azure
|> |is so
|> |> far as I can tell a fairly recent trend (and one I'm relatively
|> |unconvinced
|> |> by). Granted the contept (whereby many interconnected nodes, when
|> |viewed
|> |> from a distance, appear to be a single coherent "fabric") could be
|> |applied
|> |> to both hardware and software, but it is most often applied to low
|> |level,
|> |> interconnected hardware such as SANs and InfiniBand... and
servers:
|> |>
|> |>> What is fabric computing and how does it improve upon current
|server
|> |>> technology?
|> |>> The simplest way to think about it is the next-generation
|> |architecture for
|> |>> enterprise servers. Fabric computing combines powerful server
|> |capabilities
|> |>> and advanced networking features into a single server structure.
|> |>
|> |> We do need something to refer to the underlying hardware/firmware
|but
|> |I'm
|> |> even less convinced by proposed alternatives ("unified computing"
|> |being the
|> |> most obvious example). Perhaps "Hardware Fabric" would clarify?
|> |>
|> |> Sam
|> |>
|> |>
|>