[occi-wg] Current drafts and comments on "pre-9th" draft for Standards Roadmap document; meeting schedule
Edmonds, AndrewX
andrewx.edmonds at intel.com
Thu Mar 31 04:40:47 CDT 2011
Regarding the SLA at SOI implementation of OCCI the following videos show how
we use OCCI in a more PaaS style. OCCI powers the infrastructure service
that provides virtual machines that are guaranteed by automated SLAs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oGwGBqbk4Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZhQ4sl1CTg
The OCCI implementation that backs the demo is one that is based on OCCI 1.0
with additional SLA at SOI functionality added. Currently the SLA at SOI
implementation is being upgraded to OCCI v1.1.
In terms of OpenNebula and OCCI, Florian Feldhaus and his team from UDO
having been updating OpenNebula to provide full OCCI v1.1 compliance and
gave us a good demonstration of the implementation at yesterday's OCCI
confcall (thanks Florian!). That code will soon be made public.
HTH,
Andy
PS: The SLA at SOI implementation and the SSF implementation are separate ones.
-----Original Message-----
From: occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of
Thijs Metsch
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:28 AM
To: Sill, Alan
Cc: Tong, Jin; Sokol, Annie W.; Liu, Fang; Badger, Mark Lee; Hogan, Michael
D.; occi-wg at ogf.org
Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Current drafts and comments on "pre-9th" draft for
Standards Roadmap document; meeting schedule
Hi,
>> And the implementation of OCCI in OpenStack and Eucalyptus are still
under way and not released, correct?
The OpenStack implementation is still under development - I rarely have time
to work on it sadly enough. I added David Wallom to the CC list, he might be
able to give an update about OCCI in Eucalyptus.
>> * Is there any implementations of OCCI to offer PaaS service management?
Well since OCCI is basically a boundary protocol (See
http://occi-wg.org/about/) offerings supporting IaaS, PaaS and SaaS can be
easily created using OCCI. Most implementation support this. E.g. the SSF
(http://pyssf.sf.net) has an example on a keyvalue store or job submission.
To my last knowledge Ralf Nyren's implementation will support Redis soon.
>> * In OCCI process, is there ever any consideration of delivering some
reference implementation?
Please see this web page: http://occi-wg.org/community/implementations/
As Alan stated there are several implementations around already. The
currently two most up to date can be tested here: http://www.nyren.net/api/
and http://fjjutraa.joyent.us:8888/ (Both python implementation installable
through easy_install occi|pyssf). At least 4 implementations are currently
finalizing there last changes and should have interfaces up soon! So there
is no real reference implementation but rather a pool to choose from.
We have some compliancy test code here - which is currently OCCI bound - but
could be reused: http://occi-wg.org/2011/01/18/occi-compliance-testing-tool/
Also handy in case of testing compliancy is the ANTLR grammar Andy Edmonds
created for the SLA at SOI project. That can be found here:
https://github.com/dizz/occi-grammar
Hope this helps,
-Thijs
On Mar 31, 2011, at 4:43 AM, Sill, Alan wrote:
> Hi Jin,
>
> Thanks for your questions. My not-very-well-educated answers (I'm more on
top of the document process than the actual implementations themselves) are
embedded inline below; beyond this I invite the OCCI-WG members to comment
themselves.
>
>
> On Mar 30, 2011, at 7:07 PM, "Tong, Jin" <jin.tong at nist.gov> wrote:
>
>> Alan, thanks for sharing your comments. I have a few questions about OCCI
adoption and implementation status after going through the presentation
materials linked from your email:
>>
>> * My understanding is OpenNebula has OCCI implemented, as functional
equivalent to EC2 interface for VM management, correct?
>
> Yes. We have definite commitments from the primary project leader for
OpenNebula for full implementation of all current OCCI features - their
present product includes support for an older version - and in his words, to
"build an ecosystem" of OpenNebula functionality around OCCI.
>
>> And the implementation of OCCI in OpenStack and Eucalyptus are still
under way and not released, correct?
>
> I have seem a screenshot of a login window from an OpenStack
implementation claiming to offer OCCI services. Beyond this and some email
confirming it is on the roadmap for the bexar release, I don't know any
details on progress in OpenStack. The Eucalyptus implementation is being
paid for by a UK-funded project that includes some other significant
enhancements for use of Eucalyptus in science infrastructure projects; my
impression is that it is underway but still perhaps a few months off.
>
>> * Is there any implementations of OCCI to offer PaaS service management?
>
> Of the implementations I have taken the time to look at, the SSF one by
SLA at SOI seems to me to be the closest to offering connections to services at
the PaaS and actual application level. Here I really don't want to stray
into territory where I'm not an expert, though, and invite the developer
community to respond. Note that several products that have implemented OCCI
or are committed to doing so, like OpenNebula for example, could themselves
be considered as PaaS products.
>
>> * In OCCI process, is there ever any consideration of delivering some
reference implementation?
>
> OGF as an SDO itself never delivers software, but concentrates on the
process of developing communities that develop work products (documents),
and encouraging implementations to be developed, then documented themselves
as part of the experience process and refinements if ant to the original
proposed recommendation before promotion to a full OGF Recommendation. The
latter category requires at least two independent implementations and an
extended period of practical use (at minimum, 6 months) plus an experience
document comparing implementation experiences in the field before promotion
to a full REC. As we already have so many implementations to compare before
even full publication of the OCCI P-REC specs, I am not worried at this
point about having enough material for the subsequent steps!
>
> So while we do not have the official process in OGF of providing official
reference implementations, I have asked the group to help provide some test
code that can be run against a demo instance of an OCCI-interfaced service
that could be used, for example, in SAJACC. Among the options to get
something going quickly for one such implementation (with quite a general
package name, but just one option among many) would be to type "easy_install
occi" to get Ralf Nyren's pypi OCCI package.
>
> https://github.com/nyren/occi-py#readme
>
> The availability of the libvirt implementation by TU-Dortmund and
popularity of libvirt as an underlying layer for IaaS products should make
other implementations easy to produce for libvirt-based products.
>
> At this point, however, I want to get out of the way as quickly as
possible and invite any OCCI group members to comment, especially if they
have answers to your questions or want to correct any mistakes I have made!
>
> Take care and best wishes,
> Alan
>
>> Thanks!
>> --Jin
>> ________________________________________
>> From: cc_standards at nist.gov [cc_standards at nist.gov] On Behalf Of Alan
Sill [Alan.Sill at ttu.edu]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 12:55 PM
>> To: CC_STANDARDS
>> Subject: Current drafts and comments on "pre-9th" draft for Standards
Roadmap document; meeting schedule
>>
>> Hi Mike and Annie,
>>
>> First of all, thank you both very much for your great leadership and
>> coordination in the NIST Standards Roadmap working group. Thanks also
>> to the group for their great work so far.
>>
>> Due to travel, I have not had the opportunity to participate in recent
>> meetings, but see that there has been great progress on the document.
>> The text and graphical descriptions have gotten much better, and I see
>> that there is movement in filling out some information on the
>> available standards.
>>
>> As you know, OGF is close to final release of the Core and
>> Infrastructure components of the OCCI specification set, and I see
>> that it has already been incorporated into the tables as what I expect
>> it will be by the time of the NIST meeting, as an Approved Standard.
>> (This is correct; OGF terminology for a newly released standard is
>> "Proposed Recommendation" (P-REC), two implementations plus documented
>> feedback from extensive actual use in the community for an extended
>> period are required to promote a GFD document to a full REC.)
>>
>> I have asked the OCCI working group to review your current draft and
>> to provide feedback on the comment template form for any alterations
>> they would like to suggest. At this point I have only asked them for
>> suggested changes in the interest of accuracy. As you know, we have
>> had a tremendous uptake of OCCI by several open source projects and
>> now two commercial ones; this is probably due to its simplicity as an
>> extended set of features to http headers, and its consequent explicit
>> platform neutrality and language independence leading to a great ease
>> of implementation. (My last count was 18 OCCI implementations either
>> completed or in advanced states of work, and growing fast.)
>>
>> We certainly want to document this progress adequately and hope to
>> provide a proper set of comments to the draft roadmap soon, with
>> earnest hope for their incorporation.
>>
>> I note that there is not a meeting listed in the schedule for the
>> Roadmap group for this week, which would normally be tomorrow (March
>> 31). In light of the possible availability of the comments mentioned
>> above, and to give the group another chance to look over the draft
>> document, can I suggest that we meet, either as a group or just as a
>> sub-group to look a these comments, at the usual Standards Roadmap
>> meeting time of 1 pm Eastern tomorrow to discuss these?
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Finally, please note that OGF has more standards of interest to clouds
>> and other large-scale distributed computing infrastructures than just
>> OCCI. Since this type of work is the focus of our organization as an
>> SDO, we have many other specifications that have good uptake in
>> industry; in particular, the secured transport-level data transfer
>> specifications SRM and GridFTP, the WS-* based Basic Execution
>> Services family of specs including those in the OGSA series, and our
>> WS-Agreement and WS-AgreementNegotiation series oriented toward
>> automated service level agreement negotiation, license management,
>> etc. are probably also of interest. The last one mentioned (WS-
>> Negotiation for short) is in final public comment until May 15, 2011
>> at http://ogf.org/gf/docs/?public_comment or directly at
http://ogf.org/Public_Comment_Docs/Documents/2011-03/WS-Agreement-Negotiatio
n+v1.0.pdf
>> and is due to be released shortly thereafter, pending final OGF
>> Standards Council review upon completion of this public comment period.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alan
>>
>> P.S.: As a reminder to the group, the European SIENA roadmap current
>> document corresponding to this NIST one has been released; please see
http://sienainitiative.eu
>> where you can create a free account to download this or other
>> relevant documents. In particular you may be interested in the
>> presentations at the recent CloudScape III meeting, which was well-
>> attended by European distributed computing infrastructure projects and
>> government representatives, as well as by Dawn Leaf. I include below
>> a couple of direct links to the roadmap document and to the OCCI
>> presentation at that workshop, in case these might be useful.
>>
>> SIENA Roadmap document:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4az6f6y
>>
>> OGF OCCI Presentation:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4owlrwg
>>
>> Bonus link: OGF 31 Standards Plenary summary talk (March 23)
>> summarizing status of recently released documents:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4gaugsk
>>
>> Alan Sill, Ph.D
>> Senior Scientist, High Performance Computing Center
>> Adjunct Professor of Physics, TTU
>> Vice President of Standards, Open Grid Forum
>>
>> ====================================================================
>> : Alan Sill, Texas Tech University Office: Drane 162, MS 4-1167 :
>> : e-mail: Alan.Sill at ttu.edu ph. 806-742-4350 fax 806-742-4358 :
>> ====================================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> If you would like to unsubscribe from cc_standards, please send
>> an email to listproc at nist.gov with a message body of:
>>
>>
>>
>> unsubscribe cc_standards
>>
>>
>>
>> Please note: you must send the message from the account that you are
subscribed.
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
_______________________________________________
occi-wg mailing list
occi-wg at ogf.org
http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5213 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20110331/cba1d8a3/attachment-0001.bin
-------------- next part --------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Ireland Limited (Branch)
Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland
Registered Number: E902934
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
More information about the occi-wg
mailing list