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

[Alexis Richardson]

+1

KISS aaS ;-)


On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Simon Wardley
<simon.wardley at canonical.com> wrote:
> 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/
>
>