[occi-wg] Networks: attributes and verbs

[Sam Johnston]

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:05 PM, Tim Bray <Tim.Bray at sun.com> wrote:

> What Sam's saying seems sensible to me.   At Sun, our core minimum set of
> nouns is VM, VM Template, Private network, public IP address, and "cluster",
> a simple grouping mechanism.  I can't imagine constructing anything useful
> with much less than that.  -Tim
>

Thanks Tim - let's see if you still think so when I explain further:

   - Your "VM" is our "server" resource - we don't care if you run VPSs, VMs
   or physical machines.
   - VM Templates are a WiP but basically a "server" that lacks a "start"
   button so far... rather something like a "clone" operation. They may have
   their own category. There's different types of templates - resources (e.g.
   Amazon's "small" and "large" instances), appliances (e.g. published AMIs),
   combinations of the two, and quite probably others I haven't thought of. I
   think this approach is flexible enough.
   - Your "Private network" is our "network"... which is itself basically a
   physical piece of wire/hub. I don't think IPs pull enough weight around here
   to become first class citizens (I just don't see the point) so they
   currently hang off networks.
   - Your "cluster" is our "category" - I very much prefer being as flexible
   as possible when it comes to taxonomies because this tends to be highly
   application-specific and varies from user to user. Atom is particularly good
   here as it allows us to have multiple vocabularies - such as "Operating
   System" or "Location" and as a significant bonus folksonomies (user-tagging)
   are thrown in for free. Questions like "give me all my windows boxes in
   california" become URLs like
http://example.com/-/Windows/Californiaunder the current proposal.

The last point is something that I've been meaning to bring up separately
(and likely will soon) as the model Andy recently added uses more
traditional and less flexible groups with a global namespace. For tiny
installations that might be ok but anything bigger than that will obviously
benefit from flexible organisation - it is after all just like an infinitely
large library.

In any case I hope you will agree that we can keep things simple and get by
with three resources.

Sam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20090513/6c87cd7a/attachment.html