Re: [clouds] A cloud ref. framework for your review and comments

"Natale, Bob" <RNATALE@mitre.org> Sun, 01 August 2010 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <RNATALE@mitre.org>
X-Original-To: clouds@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: clouds@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 765F33A6835 for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.300, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a0pLJyMpZbtM for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (smtp-bedford.mitre.org [129.83.20.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9216E3A693E for <clouds@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o71NQ02i000828 for <clouds@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:26:01 -0400
Received: from imchub1.MITRE.ORG (imchub1.mitre.org [129.83.29.73]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o71NQ0sH000825; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:26:00 -0400
Received: from IMCMBX2.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.205]) by imchub1.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.73]) with mapi; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:26:00 -0400
From: "Natale, Bob" <RNATALE@mitre.org>
To: Sam Johnston <sj@google.com>, Paul Unbehagen <paul@unbehagen.net>, "Fargano, Michael" <Michael.Fargano@qwest.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:25:59 -0400
Thread-Topic: [clouds] A cloud ref. framework for your review and comments
Thread-Index: Acswk2vS5RS27y4/Slqh2/6xE4i0rQBOnpRA
Message-ID: <17969D855F28964C88D177D45B6CDF1104D3B76237@IMCMBX2.MITRE.ORG>
References: <AANLkTinvqsPzwBDxrj74RXpys21x2BRmJFBcoc8vbRhW@mail.gmail.com> <294030129BF751408412C35312657D974E7991B241@qtdenexmbm21.AD.QINTRA.COM> <AANLkTinW9dXdbArLGp2oKRt3QbzHhLL+zm=TdaQK-cCE@mail.gmail.com> <25C3B27C-5DF8-4855-A272-BD10591F6B6F@unbehagen.net> <AANLkTi=ap4AbXYKq_3ZDqyKR7JOzcx8j9EoLpRqoNxnG@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=ap4AbXYKq_3ZDqyKR7JOzcx8j9EoLpRqoNxnG@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_17969D855F28964C88D177D45B6CDF1104D3B76237IMCMBX2MITREO_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "clouds@ietf.org" <clouds@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [clouds] A cloud ref. framework for your review and comments
X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list <clouds.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds>, <mailto:clouds-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/clouds>
List-Post: <mailto:clouds@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:clouds-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds>, <mailto:clouds-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:25:39 -0000

Hi Sam,

In the general case, I don't think it is accurate to say that [all] private clouds lack multi-tenancy - it's just that their tenant base is restricted relative to that of public clouds.  The tenant base for a private cloud might be multiple departments, divisions, or even multiple distinct corporations (all members of the same conglomerate, for example).  In some cases, those tenant bases will have legal, cultural, or logistical grounds that equate effective independence in this context.

Cheers,
BobN

From: clouds-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sam Johnston
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 5:33 AM
To: Paul Unbehagen
Cc: clouds@ietf.org; Fargano, Michael
Subject: Re: [clouds] A cloud ref. framework for your review and comments

On 30 July 2010 20:20, Paul Unbehagen <paul@unbehagen.net<mailto:paul@unbehagen.net>> wrote:
Along that vein of thought the network components are just as important as more and more private clouds get built.

Again this is the tail wagging the dog (and assumes you accept the premise that "private" cloud is even cloud given it lacks multi-tenancy and therefore requires significant capex, engineering for peak loads, etc.). Once there is some sanity around emulating legacy (e.g. virtual machines) in the infrastructure space the focus will quickly shift to platforms (app runtimes, databases, queues, etc.). The sooner the better if you ask me.

For now let's keep it simple at the upper level and drill down where & when we need to.

Sam