Re: [clouds] Thoughts on ClooudOPS

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Wed, 16 February 2011 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 D25553A6CFF for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:51:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6, 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 XpHbBwKZasCg for <clouds@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:51:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9F43A6A00 for <clouds@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:51:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from leavealone.cisco.com (72-163-0-129.cisco.com [72.163.0.129]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3FEC2400F6; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:09:57 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4D5C2AD3.6020601@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:51:47 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bhumip Khasnabish <vumip1@gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinm925CP5KDCDqyXEOKVbd5g0QQx1AdTeHt0qFQ@mail.gmail.com> <14584D6EE26B314187A4F68BA206060006933C32@ASHEVS008.mcilink.com> <4D55956D.7050201@it.uc3m.es> <62B843A2D44446C2B7C8B187F47A957F@china.huawei.com> <AANLkTinCyjko2ZJm5ApAfmBjMMV4a1MGD-r=CsmGvOF=@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinCyjko2ZJm5ApAfmBjMMV4a1MGD-r=CsmGvOF=@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms070408010208040406040307"
Cc: clouds@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [clouds] Thoughts on ClooudOPS
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: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 19:51:24 -0000

I see no reason to delay closing of this list.

In fact, I suggest that it might be more productive for folks who are
interested in these topics to self-organize on lists hosted elsewhere,
instead of continuing to consume IETF bandwidth (both electronic and
mental).

On 2/16/11 10:29 AM, Bhumip Khasnabish wrote:
> I am requesting Peter to keep this mailing list up and running until 
> cloudops@ietf.org <mailto:cloudops@ietf.org>or dcops@ietf.org 
> <mailto:dcops@ietf.org> and cloudApps@ietf.org
> <mailto:cloudApps@ietf.org>or vdi@ietforg <mailto:vdi@ietforg>are
> created.
> 
> Ron, Pls let me know what we need to do to get cloudops@ietf.org 
> <mailto:cloudops@ietf.org>or dcops@ietf.org
> <mailto:dcops@ietf.org>created.
> 
> Peter, Is it possible to keep clouds@ietf.org
> <mailto:clouds@ietf.org> for CloudApps (with focus on VDI)
> discussion. If not pls consider my request to create vdi@ietf.org 
> <mailto:vdi@ietf.org>, and may be we can keep the same WiKi website
> to keep the contributions.. PLS let me know what you think and how
> we should proceed. Thanks again. Best. Bhumip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Spencer Dawkins 
> <spencer@wonderhamster.org <mailto:spencer@wonderhamster.org>>
> wrote:
> 
> Just to mention one more issue ...
> 
> Peter Saint-Andre said he would request that the IETF Secretariat 
> close this mailing list two weeks ago.
> 
> If you guys would like to have a place to discuss CloudOPS (or Data 
> Center Ops, or ...) it would probably be great if you requested a 
> mailing list for that. I'm thinking that Ron Bonica would be the 
> right contact for that.
> 
> If you guys would like to have a place to discuss Virtual Desktop 
> stuff, Peter said he might be willing to create a mailing list for 
> that, so he would be an excellent choice as the contact for that.
> 
> I'm kind of surprised that this mailing list is still working at all
> :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Spencer
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "marcelo bagnulo braun" 
> <marcelo@it.uc3m.es <mailto:marcelo@it.uc3m.es>> To: <clouds@ietf.org
> <mailto:clouds@ietf.org>> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 2:00 PM
> 
> Subject: Re: [clouds] Thoughts on ClooudOPS
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> just to point out some issues...
> 
> below...
> 
> El 11/02/11 20:48, So, Ning escribió:
> 
> 
> Bhumip and all,
> 
> As discussed in this morning’s call, here are my personal views on
> the proposed CloudOPS WG and the related drafts.
> 
> Frameworks, high-level requirements, and best practices descriptions
> on cloud infrastructure that impact multiple IETF protocols under
> different areas and WGs,
> 
> If it is an OPS area WG what you are proposing, then the work you 
> propose should fall into OPS, don't you think? (as opposed to
> multiple areas) If the work you propose fall into other WG, then it
> should go to the other WGs, right?
> 
> 
> and/or protocols outside of IETF, belong to the CloudOPS WG.
> 
> If protocols are outside the IETF, then they shouldn't be defined in
> the IETF, don't you agree?
> 
> New protocols that impact multiple IETF protocols under different
> areas and WGs,
> 
> similar comment here, if this is an OPS WG, then it should work
> within the OPS area scope again, if the protocol is being defined in
> another WG, then the work should be done in that WG.
> 
> 
> and/or protocols outside of IETF, also belong to the CloudOPS WG.
> 
> work outside the IETF, should be done, well, outside the IETF
> 
> ARMD WG’s work is very focused and much needed, and I voiced my 
> support for its establishment. However, I see difficulties in 
> broadening its charter to make it a single and only default CloudOPS
> WG. All the non-ARMD related drafts will become distraction and cause
> confusion.
> 
> i agree you should leave ARMD alone. It is well defined and well
> scoped problem and it is good as it currently is
> 
> In my humble opinion, the following drafts belong to the CloudOPS WG.
> Many of them were presented at Cloud BoF in IETF79, and are in the
> process of getting updated for IETF80. Several are new submissions
> that are recently uploaded. I think what we have here is more than
> one and half hours of meeting time JI really do not want to inflict
> the pain on my ARMD friends.
> 
> I don't think you are approaching this from the right perspective. 
> This is not about draft, is about real problems and concrete items
> that you want to work on. You should work on defining a charter, not
> in voicing for drafts that should be included in a WG that doesn't
> exist yet.
> 
> In addition, all this long list seems to cover a too wide variety of 
> topics. I would reccomend to be less ambitious, define a much scoped
> work, by defining a charter (As opposed to write drafts)
> 
> my two cents
> 
> regards, marcelo
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Cloud Reference Framework 2. Cloud Security Framework 3. VPN
> Extension for Cloud Services 4. Network Abstraction for Enterprise
> and SP Class Cloud 5. Protocol Considerations for Workload Mobility
> in Clouds 6. Service Management for Virtualized Cloud 7. Virtual
> Network Management Information Model 8. Network Probability
> Requirements and Models 9. Syslog Extension for Cloud Using Syslog
> Structured Data 10. Virtual Resource Management (VRM) in Clouds
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Ning So
> 
> Network Evolution Planning
> 
> Verizon, Inc.
> 
> (office) 972-729-7905
> 
> (Cell) 972-955-0914
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  *From:*clouds-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org> 
> [mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:clouds-bounces@ietf.org>] *On
> Behalf Of *Bhumip Khasnabish *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2011
> 11:46 PM *To:* clouds@ietf.org <mailto:clouds@ietf.org> *Subject:*
> [clouds] Conf call on Friday [11-February-2011] at 10 AM US/NY time
> 
> Please plan to join a conf call on *Friday, 11-Feb.-2011 starting
> from 10 AM ET* (New York, USA time)
> 
> to get updates on the Clouds initiatives/activities.
> 
> [you may find the current NY/USA time (from your location) at the
> following URL: 
> http://www.worldtimeserver.com/current_time_in_US-NY.aspx ].
> 
> 
> Dial in number: *US Toll-free +1-866-710-5490 *If the toll-free
> number does not work, pls use *+001-203-875-8973* *Passcode: 204
> 1744*
> 
> (Thanks to Mr. Ning So for providing the conf bridge).
> 
> **
> 
> *_Proposed Agenda:_*
> 
> **
> 
> 1. VEPC draft update -- Ning et al 2. CloudLog draft update -- Gene
> and Sam 3. Data Center Operations (DCOPS) proposal update -- Ross
> (with info from Ron, if any) 4.
> draft-rfc-seamless-Cloud-masum-01.txt
> 
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/attachment/wiki/Clouds/draft-rfc-seamless-Cloud-masum-01.txt>(27.1
>
> 
KB) – Masum et al, /Network Abstraction for Enterprise and SP
> class Cloud: Seamless Cloud Abstraction and Interfaces / 5. Protocol
> Considerations for Workload Mobility in Clouds.txt
> 
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/attachment/wiki/Clouds/Protocol%20Considerations%20for%20Workload%20Mobility%20in%20Clouds.txt>(21.5
>
> 
KB) - Masum et al, /Protocol Considerations for Workload
> Mobility in Clouds / 6.
> Karavettil-et-al-IETF-Cloud-Security-Framework-11Feb2011_v2.pdf
> 
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/attachment/wiki/Clouds/Karavettil-et-al-IETF-Cloud-Security-Framework-11Feb2011_v2.pdf>(0.6
>
> 
MB) – Suren et al, /updated cloud security framework (CSF)
> slides / 7. draft-yokota-cloud-service-mobility-01.txt
> 
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/attachment/wiki/Clouds/draft-yokota-cloud-service-mobility-01.txt>(42.0
>
> 
KB) – Mr. Yokota et al, /Service Management for Virtualized
> Networks / 8. Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) Requirements and
> Survey update – Mr. Wang and Mr. Ma 9. Cloud (client and network
> sides) APIs update - Sam 10. VRM update -- Mr Chu et al 11. VDI
> proposal expectations (further guidance) -- Peter Saint-Andre 12. VDI
> proposal development -- TBD 13. Any other topics?
> 
> As always, all of the drafts and presentations are available at the
> following URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/Clouds
> 
> *Next conf call*will be held on
> 
> *_Friday-18-February-2011_**starting from 10 AM ET*(New York, USA
> time).
> 
> *Many Thanks for Participation and Contributions.*
> 
> Best Regards.
> 
> Bhumip Khasnabish (Mobile:+001-781-752-8003, vumip1 at gmail.com 
> <http://gmail.com/> <mailto:vumip1%20at%20gmail.com 
> <mailto:vumip1%2520at%2520gmail.com>>) 
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhumipkhasnabish
>