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

Sun Apr 19 13:48:45 CDT 2009

My $0.0001 cents work

Back in 2006 we used to describe the computing stack (when it came to
utility computing) in terms of three layers :-

Software : the provision of complete user applications [no-one wanted to
call it applications because the acronym would have been "Application as
a Server or "AaaS"]

Framework: includes development platform, messaging queue, databases and
all the common elements used in the creation of an application.

Hardware : the provision of raw compute resources, storage and networks.

These ideas were based upon the concepts of componentisation. Obviously
since that time we've had all the renaming games and as Lefkowtiz
described back in July 2007 the "aaS" wars caused by the appearance of
Jedi thought masters. 

By the beginning of 2009 we had settled once again on a three layer
structure of application / platform / infrastructure.  Obviously above
these are additional layers such as data, process, organisation and ....
but let's not get into it.

Can we please stick to the three layers of application, platform and
infrastructure and not introduce any NEW concepts.

As for fabric or instance based - all three layers can be provided
either on a fabric or instance basis. SOLO is an example of an instance
based PaaS whereas Azure is a fabric based PaaS etc. EC2 might be
instance based IaaS but there is no reason why we can't (with SSI) more
of a fabric based IaaS.

Of course this is from an user perspective. From an operator perspective
you might end up with bare bones -> SSI (providing a large fabric) ->
virtual instances (for end users).

All sorts of combinations are possible. This is why we always tried to
keep it simple. I'd suggest you focus on instance based infrastructure
and keep it simple.

Just my thoughts ...

Kindest

Simon W

On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 19:19 +0100, Alexis Richardson wrote:
> You could put 'clients' at the top and 'servers' at the bottom.
> 
> 
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net> wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Krishna Sankar (ksankar)
> > <ksankar at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > OK so there are 5 layers here (there were 6 but "storage" has been consumed
> > by "infrastructure" and "services" by "software" - "fabric" was spawned
> > primarily in response to Cisco's "unified computing" foray into the server
> > space):
> >
> > Client
> > Software
> > Platform
> > Infrastructure
> > Fabric
> >
> > The idea is that fabric delivers raw computing power to the infrastructure
> > layer, which in turn delivers neatly packaged compute / network / storage to
> > the platform layer, which delivers components (e.g. queues, persistence,
> > etc.) and services (e.g. search, data feeds) to the software which in turn
> > delivers machine and user interfaces to the clients (e.g. twitter web vs
> > api).
> >
> > In any case the thing I care about for OCCI is that Infrastructure ~=
> > Compute / Network / Storage and I don't think we've got any contention
> > there.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >>
> >> |-----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
> >> |> |>
> >> |> |>
> >> |>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-- 
Simon Wardley
Software Services Manager,
Canonical Ltd.
TEL: +44 (0)207 630 2451
MOB : +44 (0)7972 911 449
TWITTER: http://www.twitter.com/swardley/