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

[Thijs Metsch]

Hi,

Regarding the terminology I would still suggest to use *aaS so everybody
know what we are talking about and we do not need to explain our-selfs
in footnotes or similar. 

I know somebody might get bored of the *aaS think but let's not create a
new terminology for something that already exists.

Cheers,

-Thijs

On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 18:00 +0200, Sam Johnston wrote:
> G'day Krishna,
> 
> Actually no, that's by design and the deviation from last year's 6
> layer stack (see Wikipedia) was to take into account a trend towards
> the (overly simplistic IMO) infrastructure (IaaS) / platform (PaaS)
> and software (SaaS) three-layer stack. I think this model finds a good
> balance without going overboard*. Software runs on a platform which
> runs on infrastructure.
> 
> Regarding terminology, I think we've all had more than enough *aaS so
> I generally push the following terminology:
>       * Software as a Service -> Cloud Software [Services] -> Software
>         Services
>       * Platform as a Service -> Cloud Platform [Services] -> Platform
>         Services
>       * Infrastructure as a Service -> Cloud Infrastructure Services
>         -> Infrastructure Services
> I'm imagining that before too long we'll have "Cloud" in front of
> everything (because everything is cloud computing, right?) and then it
> will just fade away as has been the case with previous paradigm
> shifts.
> 
> I'm also imagining that infrastructure will fast become boring and
> "cloud as an operating environment" with loosely coupled components
> connected by queues and the like will take over.
> 
> Sam
> 
> * more complex modelling is useful for implementors moreso than
> consumers.
> 
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Krishna Sankar (ksankar)
> <ksankar at cisco.com> wrote:
>         Sam, 
>         
>                         Isn’t the platform and infrastructure
>         reversed ? IMHO, Infrastructure should be above the platform.
>         Also shouldn’t we have a VM layer just below the software ?
>         
>         Cheers
>         
>         <k/>
>         
>          
>         
>         From: occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org]
>         On Behalf Of Sam Johnston
>         Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 1:25 AM
>         To: occi-wg at ogf.org
>         Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Resource Types: Compute / Network /
>         Storage
>         
>         
>         
>          
>         
>         Morning,
>         
>         Turns out this isn't such a bad idea as between writing and
>         sending that post Andy Edmonds independently suggested exactly
>         the same thing via the wiki (suggestion: change workload to
>         compute - workload might be something ran on a compute
>         resource).
>         
>         This is such a good (albeit obvious) idea - thanks David/RM-WG
>         - that I've even updated my cloud computing reference model
>         (attached) by adding "network' to it.
>         
>         Sam
>         
>         On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net>
>         wrote:
>         
>         Evening,
>         
>         So one thing I did see validated by the rm-wg document was the
>         trend towards compute/network/storage that we're fast settling
>         on ourselves.
>         
>         Our current terminology however is far more specific - we've
>         picked up "Drive" and "Server" from ElasticHosts for example.
>         While this does make sense a lot of the time there's nothing
>         to say that OCCI can't be used for VDI for example, where the
>         "servers" are in fact "clients". Take it a step further and
>         you've got things like Dreamhost PS which kind of like a
>         virtual provate server in that it behaves like one (it can be
>         restarted via their API etc.), only it refers to resource
>         allocations in a shared hosting environment or MySQL
>         instances.
>         
>         Granted that's outside of our remit but ther'es no point
>         stopping them from using it by choosing our terminology
>         poorly. In fact a lot of these functions can apply equally to
>         physical machines as they can to lightweight threads in an
>         Apache process (and everything in between including, of
>         course, virtual machines which are currently our primary
>         target).
>         
>         I've been trying to think of other resources outside of these
>         three main types but even strange things like ISDN interfaces
>         (yes, this sort of thing does appear in enterprise data
>         centers) can be handled via PCI passthrough parameters on a
>         virtual machine.
>         
>         All in all, unless anyone has any concerns about this approach
>         I'd like to adopt this terminology throughout.
>         
>         Sam
>         
>         
>          
>         
>         
> 
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-- 
Thijs Metsch                        Tel: +49 (0)941 3075-122 (x60122)
http://blogs.sun.com/intheclouds
Software Engineer Grid Computing
Sun Microsystems GmbH
Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 7               mailto:thijs.metsch at sun.com
D-93049 Regensburg                  http://www.sun.com