[apps-discuss] FW: New Version(-01) for VDI(Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) problem statement document

liang.liang12@zte.com.cn Fri, 01 July 2011 01:01 UTC

Return-Path: <liang.liang12@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C2621F8814 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.238
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4bbnBWeViahr for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBDA21F8812 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 131321193944097; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 08:57:16 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [] by [] with StormMail ESMTP id 13796.1193944097; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:00:45 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p6110fTF024657 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:00:41 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from liang.liang12@zte.com.cn)
To: apps-discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: 355208F3:25BF1A93-482578C0:0003CD25; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OF355208F3.25BF1A93-ON482578C0.0003CD25-482578C0.00058BB5@zte.com.cn>
From: liang.liang12@zte.com.cn
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:00:29 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-07-01 09:00:42, Serialize complete at 2011-07-01 09:00:42
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00058BB4482578C0_="
X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p6110fTF024657
Subject: [apps-discuss] FW: New Version(-01) for VDI(Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) problem statement document
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 01:01:00 -0000

Dear All,

We just published version-01 for VDI problem statement, reworked based on 
from different sources. Thanks a lot for your valuable comments! Following 
the detail for version-01 document, pls. help review it and welcome any 

Filename:                 draft-wang-appsawg-vdi-problem-statement
Revision:                 01
Title:                            Virtual Desktop Infrastructure Problem 
Creation date:            2011-06-30
WG ID:                            Individual Submission
Number of pages: 16

   The Virtual Desktop Infrastructure is a technology to separate local
   desktop and remote computing/storage resources, which was initially
   derived from the remote desktop administration but with new business
   models and very different use cases.  Most of existing VDI systems
   are based on proprietary implementation, and positioning different
   market with different features.  Since virtual desktop technology is
   believed to be a mainstream application delivery method, like http
   protocol against web applications, so it's important to make the
   virtual desktop access protocol open and standard.  This draft
   summarizes the limitations of existing virtual desktop systems, and
   proposes the intent standardization work in IETF.


In last mail we didn't describe why we submitted our drafts in IETF 
APPSAWG and it
confused many, including our chairman. So I want to say sorry for that. 
Now I want 
to explain it briefly:
- In current cloud-computing age, more and more "physical computer" will 
be moved
into cloud. For end-user whose computers run in the cloud, people will use 
kind of clients to connect to their remote computers. Currently this is 
by enterprises around the world, and we believe it will be widely adopted 
both enterprise and consumer market in near future, just like HTTP we used 
- Currently there are different protocols for communication between user 
and remote
computer, like VNC, SPICE and etc (described in the survey document). And 
at the 
same time there will be some trouble if we don't standardize this 
protocol, which 
is described in the problem statement document.
- VDI protocol runs on top of existing transport and network layer, and it 
is one
application protocol, like HTTP. Because it will re-use many protocols 
designed in
IETF, like TCP/IP, TLS/DTLS and etc, we think IETF is the best place. And 
APPSAWG focuses on protocols presented in user-oriented programs, so we 
these two documents in APPSAWG.

Have a nice day!


ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.