Re: [clouds] Use cases

Mark.
I would agree with  that.
Like you said there are several initiatives going on in SNIA and TOG for example.

I do not see, however, interoperability/API, data exchange formats and security covered anywhere.

--Gene

From: Mark Webb [mailto:mwebb@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:09 AM
To: clouds@ietf.org
Cc: Peter Saint-Andre; Gene Golovinsky
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> [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 9:48 AM
To: clouds@ietf.org<mailto: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<mailto:clouds@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clouds