Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big

Bhumip,

 Having attended-participated at the BoF and following this thread, some of my suggestions moving forward:

1. Clear problem statement; and specifically what corresponding protocol work should the IETF develop and or reuse;

2. To [1] goes an SDO/Forum gap analysis [if not done already] as to assure there is unnecessary replication of work and/or potential of SDO/forum clash  output = scope

3. Identification of use case examples;

4. Finally,  is there any potential for interlock with work being kicked off at the IRTF Virtual Networks Research Group WG?

Best regards

Monique

-----Original Message-----
From: clouds-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of Bhumip Khasnabish
Sent: Thu 4/8/2010 9:07 AM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: clouds@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big

of course there are and will be many workitems within the theme of
cloud-based systems, services, inter-cloud system, and so on.  Cloud-based
storage, cloud-based mobile-data backup service,  cloud-based network
service in order to maintain service continuity, disaster-tolerant
communications, etc. are a few examples. Can we keep the discussion in the
same group please. Thanks a lot.

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Linda Dunbar <ldunbar@huawei.com> wrote:

>  I am looking at a very different angle of the "Cloud". Rather than the
> "IT functions as a service", I am looking at Virtual Network Services and
> Storage Services which can be offered by Service Providers.
>
> Are there anyone else interested in this area? Maybe we should form a
> separate discussion group.
>
>
>
> Linda Dunbar
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Gene Golovinsky [mailto:gene@alertlogic.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 08, 2010 7:37 AM
> *To:* Linda Dunbar; carlw@mcsr-labs.org; 'Mark Webb'; clouds@ietf.org
>
> *Subject:* RE: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big
>
>
>
> While I agree that SaaS, IaaS and PaaS are different categories they all
> basically do the same thing - letting people consume IT functions as
> service.
>
> As a result the same multiple problem spaces apply: users need to be
> authenticated, their access need to be controlled, activities audited, data
> protected, functionality provisioned and the list goes on.
>
>
>
> Cloud Security Alliance mentioned earlier does not necessarily deal with
> those issues. I read their guidelines and it mostly deals with deployment
> recommendations, but the area of auditing for example is not really covered.
>
>
>
>
> Ability to audit is really important if we want to insure that people that
> care about compliance actually use cloud technologies. Yet neither ability,
> nor technology for that is there. While traditional logging (syslog) is not
> good enough for the cloud simply because we are dealing with shared and
> dynamically allocated resources and user info is not consistently available.
>
>
>
>
> --Gene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* clouds-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Linda Dunbar
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 07, 2010 12:16 PM
> *To:* carlw@mcsr-labs.org; 'Mark Webb'; clouds@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big
>
>
>
> I find it difficult that people in the same room talking about totally
> different subjects. Very hard to get the discussion moving forward.
>
>
>
> Linda
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Carl Williams [mailto:carlw@mcsr-labs.org]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 07, 2010 11:59 AM
> *To:* 'Linda Dunbar'; 'Mark Webb'; clouds@ietf.org
> *Subject:* RE: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big
>
>
>
> The name is irrelevant and perhaps in future it could change to avoid
> distraction.  The technology discussions is what is key and that is what was
> discussed in the informal meeting.  From what I can tell the purpose was to
> get some informal discussion going first and see what people are thinking.
> There seems to be some conclusion that the next step was to conduct a gap
> analysis.
>
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* clouds-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Linda Dunbar
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 07, 2010 11:48 AM
> *To:* 'Mark Webb'; clouds@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big
>
>
>
> I attended the CLOUD's bar BOF. I don't think it is appropriate for IETF to
> have a working group on "CLOUD" because it means different things to
> different people. Cloud computing is a general term for anything that
> involves delivering services over the Internet. I can see three basic
> categories:
>
> p     Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS<http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid201_gci1358983,00.html>
> ),
>
> p     Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS)<http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid201_gci1332892,00.html>and
>
> p     Software-as-a-Service (SaaS<http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid201_gci1170781,00.html>
> )
>
>
>
> There are a lot of stuff under each of the categories above. I suggest
> separating them and further studying if there are enough contents for one of
> them to become a working group.
>
>
>
> Linda Dunbar
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
> *From:* clouds-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Mark Webb
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:09 AM
> *To:* clouds@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [clouds] Use cases
>
>
>
> I was not there at the BoF, but did get reports from a couple of people in
> attendance.
>
>
>
> An important perspective is to ensure IETF does NOT start a new effort that
> overlaps with other SDO and Forum already underway.  The industry does not
> need more SDO declaring they are relevant to cloud computing IMO.
>
>
>
> Seeking contributions on relevant & IETF appropriate gap analysis is the
> _most_ that should be pursued at this point in time.
>
>
>
> Mark Webb
>
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Gene Golovinsky wrote:
>
>
>
> Well, I think this is a topic worthy of IETF time and attention.
> How can I help to move the discussion forward?
>
> Was there any specific area out of the white paper discussed?
> I think Cloud interoperability and security are topics were IETF is
> traditionally focusing its efforts.
>
> --Gene
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: clouds-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org<clouds-bounces@ietf.org>]
> On Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 9:48 AM
> To: clouds@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [clouds] Use cases
>
> On 4/7/10 8:40 AM, Gene Golovinsky wrote:
>
> >    2. I saw references to bar BoF at last IETF meeting, but could not
> >       really figure out if the WG was chartered.
>
> It was a bar BoF, not a real BoF. And IMHO the discussion was so nebulous
> that folks are a long way from forming a WG.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clouds mailing list
> clouds@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clouds mailing list
> clouds@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds
>
>

-- 
Best Regards.

Bhumip Khasnabish (Mobile:+001-781-752-8003, bhumip@acm.org)

© 2010 Bhumip Khasnabish. Do not view, print, forward, and save the content
of this email if you are not the intended recipient of the communiqué.