Re: [clouds] __答复:_scope_of_the_cloud

"zhangyunfei" <> Fri, 09 April 2010 09:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DFB73A6809 for <>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 02:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -90.283
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-90.283 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.555, BAYES_50=0.001, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_81=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_82=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sf9OcoCG7Ksu for <>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 02:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6CC13A6359 for <>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 02:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LENOVO-917FFE55 ([]) by (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.5FP1) with SMTP id 2010040917374728-18128 ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:37:47 +0800
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:20:00 +0800
From: "zhangyunfei" <>
To: "Sam Johnston" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
Message-ID: <>
X-mailer: Foxmail 6, 2, 103, 20 [cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.5FP1 | April 14, 2006) at 2010-04-09 17:37:47, Serialize by Router on cmccmta/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.5FP1 | April 14, 2006) at 2010-04-09 17:20:22, Serialize complete at 2010-04-09 17:20:22
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====003_Dragon232873512212_====="
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [clouds] =?gb2312?b?X1+08Li0Ol9zY29wZV9vZl90aGVfY2xvdWQ=?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:21:18 -0000

Thanks Sam for the reply.
Personally I think the migration,resource description(maybe there are similar efforts in other SDOs already) are good topics to discuss.
As for lightweight HTTP, I am not sure if this is an unique problem in cloud applications.It should be treated as an independent problem in my point of view.
Just two cents.



发件人: Sam Johnston
发送时间: 2010-04-09 17:04:20
收件人: zhangyunfei
抄送: Wang Xu; meng.yu;
主题: Re: [clouds] __答复:_scope_of_the_cloud


My interest was not limited to virtual machines (which require some amount of choreography on either side of the actual move) but rather files, databases, code, documents - basically anything that you might want to move from A to B (where you are not necessarily A or B).

Another area of potential interest is a lightweight "profile" of HTTP for constrained devices, whereby one does not have to implement a full-blown HTTP client & server pair simply to query an electricity meter. Some of these issues were already discussed earlier this week[1]. The same could be said for application of [vanilla] HTTP to files, databases, etc. (e.g. the relevant subset of CDMI).

We're also missing a way of describing containers (e.g. hypervisors, platforms, etc.) and workloads (e.g. applications, virtual machines). CloudAudit provides a technical solution to the former (but it's out of scope) and Cisco's James Urquhart has been working on a descriptor format for the latter[2]. Both of these areas seem appropriate for IETF involvement, and indeed CloudAudit could be worked into a generic catalog service (e.g. the legal name of the provider, its location, logo, services, SLAs, etc.).

I think the best next step would be for to work torwards formalising the "clouds" effort somewhat, which will necessarily involve enumerating the opportunities for standards development and prioritising them. IETF-78 would presumably be a good forum for this activity (assuming it can't be done more inclusively on this mailing list).



On 9 April 2010 10:07, zhangyunfei <> wrote:

I just want to know more praticial deployment on this point since Sam mentioned this.
Another issue I ran into while writing cush[3] was how to remotely instruct servers to migrate (live?) resources - for example, moving a virtual machine, database, etc. from one location to another using a mobile device on a 3G connection. I believe WebDAV's COPY and MOVE verbs are a good start (this is what we're using for OCCI) but they could be reviewed and possibly promoted for more generic application.



发件人: Wang Xu
发送时间: 2010-04-09 16:03:32
收件人: meng.yu
抄送: zhangyunfei;
主题: Re:_[clouds]_答复:_scope_of_the_cloud

Yunfei  and  Meng,

Do  you  have  any  practical  use  case  of  live  migration  of  virtual
machine?  I  do  not  find  any  case  of  heavy  utilization  of VM  migration.

And  some  tests  indicated  that  the  migration  in  product  environment  is
not  mature  enough  yet.

2010/4/9   < >
>  Not  only  (virtual  )resource/(or  tasks)  migration  esp.  in  different  clouds,  but  migration  from  different  servers  in  one  cloud,  I  think  it  could  be  resonable.
>  Further,  I  am  thinking  could  them  be  harmonized  together  for  the  protocol  aspect?
>  "zhangyunfei"   < >
>  发件人:
>  2010-04-09  14:21
>  收件人
>  ""   < >,  "sjj"   < >
>  抄送
>  主题
>  [clouds]  scope  of  the  cloud
>  Hi  all.
>        Some  kindly  told  me  that  my  email  is  not  displayed  corretly.So  send  again.
>  -------------------------------------------------
>  Sam  and  all,
>      The  topic  of  standardizing  (virtual  )resource  migration  esp.  in  different  clouds  you  mentioned  sounds  interesting.Do  you  have  more  details  to  share?Thanks.
>        Another  point:Is  there  standard  protocols  in  interconnecting  different  regions  of  clusters?I  thinks  if  there  are  room  to  expolore,it  would  be  a  suitable  topic  in  IETF.
>  BR
>  Yunfei
>  ________________________________
>  zhangyunfei
>  2010-04-09_______________________________________________
>  clouds  mailing  list
>  _______________________________________________
>  clouds  mailing  list

Wang  Xu

clouds mailing list