Re: [clouds] Clouds SDO gap analysis template (a Table)

Sam Johnston <sjj@google.com> Tue, 25 May 2010 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <sjj@google.com>
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 2BBC93A69A8 for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 IvSUnP8lgnhR for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 669783A699E for <clouds@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com [172.25.105.83]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o4PIHZVo015624 for <clouds@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:36 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1274811456; bh=B9vX/CwoeTvdDEzZQUCwElHXIMA=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=nwE+ldBCQoP0oz1rY8g429qj0DTH+jafMwRJLwE3JWr5Q8gy6IG/zjQOE2gY4Pbh+ 6czwHBDgteG4nlDkkZrZw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=pfs7BCzAlCjUPpPqy+W06+izoxvG0b+gKm1lS5B2Tyt7GR7je45Lgl/Z3lzcamX6W efDr9gctyI5v2Tr+GubQA==
Received: from wye20 (wye20.prod.google.com [10.241.226.20]) by kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o4PIHHJT008319 for <clouds@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:34 -0700
Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20so1666370wye.31 for <clouds@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.86.14 with SMTP id v14mr4664133wee.157.1274811453399; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.62.65 with HTTP; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4BFC0D8E.3030007@oracle.com>
References: <AANLkTikNK0e2JDPaTFKo8kZ_59TxmdG22rvBLGtFcU5e@mail.gmail.com> <4BFBFEB9.1080606@oracle.com> <AANLkTikFsY2KS7xIDhHwKTyUQKBZSHrisdgHuIhPURaB@mail.gmail.com> <4BFC0D8E.3030007@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 20:17:33 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTillQUoRixi4gqjlqTRTE8n7WIeXVJonS-M6yOsD@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sam Johnston <sjj@google.com>
To: Mark Carlson <mark.carlson@oracle.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7eb68d5e53204876f2b27
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: clouds@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [clouds] Clouds SDO gap analysis template (a Table)
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: Tue, 25 May 2010 18:17:57 -0000

Bhumip/Mark,

In terms of gap analysis, I'd be more interested in seeing other groups
feeding into IETF than having it picking up the scraps. I certainly intend
to submit CloudAudit, and ideally [parts of] OCCI to the I-D/RFC process for
a start. IETF is well known for having clean, interoperable specifications
which is something specialist groups are not so good at.

Sam

On 25 May 2010 19:49, Mark Carlson <mark.carlson@oracle.com> wrote:

>  That's great. When the IETF decides what it wants to do, you should
> also create and maintain an entry up there.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- mark
>
> On 5/25/10 11:15 AM, Bhumip Khasnabish wrote:
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> Thanks for your inputs and suggestions.
>
> Yes, we'll utilize all of the relevant existing information from the sites
> that you mention and a few others.
>
> As you know our objective is to determine the gaps (existing and emerging)
> and focus on where IETF can contribute in terms of standardization (protocol
> development, protocol extension recommendation, etc.) and profile
> development for Cloud-based services.
>
> Hope these help clarify matters.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Best.
>
> Bhumip
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Mark Carlson <mark.carlson@oracle.com>wrote;wrote:
>
>> Bhumip,
>>
>> Not sure why you are doing this. The information you need is largely
>> already
>> available on http://cloud-standards.org wiki. Each SDO has already
>> created
>> an entry describing their cloud work, and they use a standard template
>> already
>> to describe each standard.
>>
>> For example, here is one for an already finalized standard:
>>
>>
>>
>> http://cloud-standards.org/wiki/index.php?title=SNIA_Cloud_Data_Management_Interface_%28CDMI%29
>>
>>  Cloud Standard
>>
>> *1. The name of the specification*
>>
>> SNIA Cloud Data Management Interface
>>
>>
>> *2. A short statement (<100 words) of the purpose and function of the
>> specification* The SNIA Cloud Data Management Interface (CDMI) is the
>> functional interface that applications will use to create, retrieve, update
>> and delete data elements from the cloud. As part of this interface the
>> client will be able to discover the capabilities of the cloud storage
>> offering and use this interface to manage containers and the data that is
>> placed in them. In addition, metadata can be set on containers and their
>> contained data elements through this interface.
>>
>> *3. The version number (or other distinct identifier) and date of the
>> most recently approved version of the specification.*
>>
>> SNIA Architecture - 1.0 standard
>>
>> *4. If the specification is part of a group of explicitly related
>> specifications from the same source, the name of the group of
>> specifications.* Not applicable
>>
>> *5. URI for the normative text of the specification *http://www.snia.org/tech_activities/standards/curr_standards/cdmi
>>
>>  SOURCE
>>
>> *6. The name of the SDO that generated/authored/hosted the specification.
>> *Storage Networking Industry Association
>>
>> *7. URI for the SDO* http://snia.org
>>
>> *8. The level of approval that the SDO has conferred on the specification
>> as described by the SDO's process.* SNIA Architecture (Final Standard)
>>
>> *9. The language or languages in which the specification is available. *US
>> English
>>  SUBJECT
>>
>> *10. Which of the categories of Cloud services does the standard address?
>> *(Infrastructure as a Service - IaaS, Data Storage as a Service - DaaS,
>> Platform as a Service - PaaS, Software as a Service - SaaS) DaaS (Cloud
>> Storage)
>>
>> *11. Does the standard address both functional and management aspects of
>> the service?* Yes. Management is done by setting metadata on containers
>> of data and individual data elements. The functional interface allows CRUD
>> semantics for storage of data via HTTP.
>>  OPTIONAL
>>
>> *12. The level of approval of the specification in this generic lifecycle
>> taxonomy: *
>>
>> Final standard
>>
>>
>> *13. URI for the applicable SDO's patent and copyright rules, if any,
>> applicable to development and use of the specification.* SNIA IP Policy<http://www.snia.org/about/corporate_info/ip_policy/>
>>
>> *14. URI for the SDO's posting location, (if any) for notices from
>> participants or individuals regarding claims under the rules stated under
>> number 15.* SNIA IP Policy<http://www.snia.org/about/corporate_info/ip_policy/>
>>
>> *15. Interoperability, conformance, or certification test activity for
>> the specification (by owner name or URI). *
>>
>> None
>>
>> *16. Known implementations of the specification (by owner name or URI).*
>>
>> The SNIA Cloud Storage TWG is producing an open source reference
>> implementation.
>>
>> *17. A list (or URI pointer to same) of the other specifications* that
>> are normatively referenced in the specification. *
>>
>>
>> [ISO-8601] International Standards Organization, "Data elements and
>> interchange formats -- Information interchange -- Representation of dates
>> and times", ISO 8601:20044 -
>> http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=40874
>>
>> [ITU-T509] International Telecommunications Union Telecommunication
>> Standardization Sector (ITU-T), Recommendation X.509: Information technology
>> - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Public-key and attribute
>> certificate frameworks, May 2000. Specification and technical corrigenda -
>> http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/publications/recs.html
>>
>> [RFC2119] IETF RFC 2119 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119>. Key words
>> for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels -
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
>>
>> [RFC2045] IETF RFC 2045 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045>.
>> Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet
>> Message Bodies - http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2045.txt
>>
>> [RFC2578] IETF RFC 2578 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2578>. Structure
>> of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2) -
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2578.txt
>>
>> [RFC2616] IETF RFC 2616 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616>. Hypertext
>> Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 - http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt
>>
>> [RFC3280] IETF RFC 3280 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3280>. Internet
>> X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
>> (CRL) Profile - http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3280.txt
>>
>> [RFC3530] IETF RFC 3530 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3530>. Network
>> File System (NFS) version 4 Protocol -
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3530.txt
>>
>> [RFC3986] IETF RFC 3986 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986>. Uniform
>> Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax -
>> http://www.ietf/org/rfc/rfc3986.txt
>>
>> [RFC4346] IETF RFC 4346 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4346>. The
>> Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.1 -
>> http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4346.txt
>>
>> [RFC4627] IETF RFC 4627 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627>. The
>> application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) -
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt
>>
>> [RFC5246] IETF RFC 5246 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5246>. The
>> Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2 -
>> http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5246.txt
>>
>>
>>  *18. A list (or URI pointer to same) of the other specifications* that
>> are referenced in the specification (except the ones listed under number
>> 17). *
>>
>> [CRC] Williams, Ross, "A Painless Guide to CRC Error Detection
>> Algorithms", Chapter 16, August 1993,
>> http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_crc_v3.html
>>
>> [PKS12] RSA Laboratories, PKCS #12: Personal Information Exchange Syntax,
>> Version 1.0, June 1999. Specification and Technical Corrigendum -
>> http://www.rsa.com:80/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2138<http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2138>
>>
>> [REST] "Representational State Transfer" -
>> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm<http://www.ics.uci.edu/%7Efielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm>
>>
>> [RESTful Web] Richardson, Leonard and Sam Ruby, RESTful Web Services,
>> O'Reilly, 2007.
>>
>> [SIRDM] Storage Industry Resource Domain Model -
>> http://www.snia.org/education/storage_networking_primer/sirdm/
>>
>>
>> *19. A list (or URI pointer to same) of other specifications* with which
>> the specification may (speculatively) interoperate or act in complementary,
>> compatible fashion. *
>>
>> OCCI - see OGF entry.
>>
>> *20. A list (or URI pointer to same) of other specifications* similar to
>> this specification. (Whether or not substitutable.) *
>>
>> None.
>>  -----------------------------------
>>
>> The template can be found here:
>> http://cloud-standards.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template
>>
>> -- mark
>>
>>
>> On 5/25/10 10:33 AM, Bhumip Khasnabish wrote:
>>
>>  Dear All,
>>
>> Attached please find a template (a Table) that can be utilized for Clouds
>> SDO gap analysis.
>>
>> Very much appreciate your comments, inputs, suggestions for updating it.
>>
>> The plan is to populate this template with SDOs' information,
>> once this template is finalized through email discussion.
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your support and contributions
>>
>> Best Regards.
>>  Bhumip
>>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> clouds mailing listclouds@ietf.orghttps://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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clouds mailing list
> clouds@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds
>
>