From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Thu Mar 1 20:31:36 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:31:36 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] fi-ware cloud weekly 1/3 - minutes Message-ID: att:Alex, Oshrit, David, Javier, Fernando, Pascal agenda: - arch spec: copied to the public wiki, except for Monitoring. last deadline next Tue. - sprints: need to update the tracker - roadmap: - SM [Fernando]: - 1st release: life cycle of a services (vApps) with OS API. Also some basic OS operations (servers, images, flavors, etc). OCCI adapter. Monitoring?? - 2nd: rebuild server, create image, elasticity & monitoring. - Cloud Edge [Pascal]: - 1st release: API for managing the life cycle of 'containers' (deploy, start/stop/etc) - 2nd: images, users. capabilities? - 3rd: monitoring API - Portal: basic user portal, integration with OS API and Keystone, monitoring dashboard? anything else? 2nd: admin portal (resource management, capacity, etc), advanced SM capabilities (elasticity, etc), other? Action Items: 1. Everyone, by Wednesday: update the tracker (sprints 1.2.1 and 1.2.2) 2. Everyone, by Monday: check arch spec at the public wiki 3. Everyone, by Monday: send out contribution to the roadmap deliverable. Instructions at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/How_to_write_down_the_Technical_Roadmap_Deliverable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrewx.edmonds at intel.com Fri Mar 2 18:01:25 2012 From: andrewx.edmonds at intel.com (Edmonds, AndrewX) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 17:01:25 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation Message-ID: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE190A861D@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> Some of you might find this of interest [1]. I presented and demo'ed this at SNIA's Cloud Plugfest this week. http://occi-wg.org/2012/03/01/occi-and-openstack/ Andy ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Fri Mar 2 18:18:18 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 19:18:18 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation In-Reply-To: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE190A861D@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE190A861D@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: Cool! Any interesting feedback? Alex From: "Edmonds, AndrewX" To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 02/03/2012 07:01 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Some of you might find this of interest [1]. I presented and demo'ed this at SNIA's Cloud Plugfest this week. http://occi-wg.org/2012/03/01/occi-and-openstack/ Andy ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrewx.edmonds at intel.com Fri Mar 2 18:24:55 2012 From: andrewx.edmonds at intel.com (Edmonds, AndrewX) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 17:24:55 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation In-Reply-To: References: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE190A861D@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE190A8695@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> Yes, lots of people asking for it! :) The code is running through Intel legal processes and should be available by mid-march if not sooner. At the plugfest we also got to compare how the OCCI OpenNebula implementation worked and the two are very very close. So there's a plan to demo management interop between the two implementations and also an OCCI-EC2 proxy one. That'll possibly happen at the session on Cloud Interoperability. FYI - for those working on the portal there were a number of HTML5 OCCI clients demo'ed and also of note from the client perspective is a JSON rendering which is near to finalisation. Andy From: Alex Glikson [mailto:GLIKSON at il.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 5:18 PM To: Edmonds, AndrewX Cc: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation Cool! Any interesting feedback? Alex From: "Edmonds, AndrewX" > To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" > Date: 02/03/2012 07:01 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] OCCI & OpenStack Implementation Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ Some of you might find this of interest [1]. I presented and demo'ed this at SNIA's Cloud Plugfest this week. http://occi-wg.org/2012/03/01/occi-and-openstack/ Andy ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Mar 5 17:13:05 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 18:13:05 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All, This is to remind you to send me your draft contribution for the Roadmap deliverable by the end of the day today. You can find a place-holder at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/FiwareDeliverableD2.4Cloud Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 01/03/2012 09:32 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] fi-ware cloud weekly 1/3 - minutes Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu att:Alex, Oshrit, David, Javier, Fernando, Pascal agenda: - arch spec: copied to the public wiki, except for Monitoring. last deadline next Tue. - sprints: need to update the tracker - roadmap: - SM [Fernando]: - 1st release: life cycle of a services (vApps) with OS API. Also some basic OS operations (servers, images, flavors, etc). OCCI adapter. Monitoring?? - 2nd: rebuild server, create image, elasticity & monitoring. - Cloud Edge [Pascal]: - 1st release: API for managing the life cycle of 'containers' (deploy, start/stop/etc) - 2nd: images, users. capabilities? - 3rd: monitoring API - Portal: basic user portal, integration with OS API and Keystone, monitoring dashboard? anything else? 2nd: admin portal (resource management, capacity, etc), advanced SM capabilities (elasticity, etc), other? Action Items: 1. Everyone, by Wednesday: update the tracker (sprints 1.2.1 and 1.2.2) 2. Everyone, by Monday: check arch spec at the public wiki 3. Everyone, by Monday: send out contribution to the roadmap deliverable. Instructions at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/How_to_write_down_the_Technical_Roadmap_Deliverable _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Tue Mar 6 21:55:43 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 22:55:43 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, I've refactored a bit the roadmap page -- added more content (incorporating the feedback I've received by now), removed GE-oriented headings, etc. Please, take a look, send me your comments, and be ready for a detailed discussion/review tomorrow at our weekly call. Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 05/03/2012 06:13 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu All, This is to remind you to send me your draft contribution for the Roadmap deliverable by the end of the day today. You can find a place-holder at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/FiwareDeliverableD2.4Cloud Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 01/03/2012 09:32 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] fi-ware cloud weekly 1/3 - minutes Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu att:Alex, Oshrit, David, Javier, Fernando, Pascal agenda: - arch spec: copied to the public wiki, except for Monitoring. last deadline next Tue. - sprints: need to update the tracker - roadmap: - SM [Fernando]: - 1st release: life cycle of a services (vApps) with OS API. Also some basic OS operations (servers, images, flavors, etc). OCCI adapter. Monitoring?? - 2nd: rebuild server, create image, elasticity & monitoring. - Cloud Edge [Pascal]: - 1st release: API for managing the life cycle of 'containers' (deploy, start/stop/etc) - 2nd: images, users. capabilities? - 3rd: monitoring API - Portal: basic user portal, integration with OS API and Keystone, monitoring dashboard? anything else? 2nd: admin portal (resource management, capacity, etc), advanced SM capabilities (elasticity, etc), other? Action Items: 1. Everyone, by Wednesday: update the tracker (sprints 1.2.1 and 1.2.2) 2. Everyone, by Monday: check arch spec at the public wiki 3. Everyone, by Monday: send out contribution to the roadmap deliverable. Instructions at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/How_to_write_down_the_Technical_Roadmap_Deliverable _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Tue Mar 6 21:56:33 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 22:56:33 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpa] IMPORTANT REMARKS regarding the FI-WARE Technical Roadmap Deliverable Message-ID: FYI, towards the roadmap discussion tomorrow. ----- Forwarded by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM on 06/03/2012 10:56 PM ----- From: Juanjo Hierro To: "fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu" , "fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 05/03/2012 07:19 PM Subject: [Fiware-wpa] IMPORTANT REMARKS regarding the FI-WARE Technical Roadmap Deliverable Sent by: fiware-wpa-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I guess you are dealing with the writing of the FI-WARE Technical Roadmap deliverable. I also guess that you would agree that, while the text we are going to produce here doesn't need to be long, it may be highly relevant because we are trying to fix there WHAT WE COMMIT TO DELIVER WHEN. Therefore, I would like to make a couple of remarks: Please try to commit for the first release what we believe is strictly a MUST, that is, things we believe that, if not brought, FI-WARE will be useless to the UC projects (or, at least, they will blame of us :-) Note that we didn't specify what we were going to bring in the first release within the current signed DoW. Therefore, nobody will be able to make the point that we are not fulfilling the DoW if we do not deliver this or that. HOWEVER, we will JUDGED with respect to whatever we commit to deliver now: if we promise to deliver something in the first release now and then we fail to deliver it, then the reviewers will have the right to say we failed and reject acceptance of, among others, the FI-WARE Testbed deliverable. It's not a matter of committing to deliver what we believe we can develop and have ready for integration by end of April based on selected baseline assets. Don't underestimate the integration efforts on the testbed. Also don't underestimate integration coordination efforts: just following up that a given GE is properly installed and configured in the Testbed will take its time not only to leaders of tasks in WP10, but also to you as chapters leads and myself ... so, why should we spent time in something that nobody would consider urgent/must ? It's better that we rather concentrate on integrating the less things possible for the first release and leave integration of things that can wait for later. We should just focus on what can be a STABLE integrated FI-WARE Release and then make it grow, adding new GEs or features in already integrated GEs. Despite we talk just about Major Releases in the FI-WARE DoW or in the Technical Roadmap Deliverable, we should plan to be able to upgrade the testbed at our convenience every three months, so that new GE software or upgrades on existing GEs arrives end of July 2012, October 2012, January 2013, Abril 2013, July 2013, ... and then new releases of the testbed are published by end of October 2012, January 2013, Abril 2013, July 2013, October 2013 respectively (we typically book three months for integration testing in the testbed). So don't hesitate to defer things for the first or the second minor release within the second major release of FI-WARE in your planning. I propose the following to handle what is planned in the different minor releases of the second major release. We will publish the Technical Roadmap deliverable just making the distinction on what goes in the first Major Release and what goes in the second Major Release of FI-WARE. And please be conservative promising things for the First Major Release. Then, what we will do is ask the UC projects: Is there anything planned for the Second Major Release you wish to have prioritized ? Then, based on their feedback, we will prioritize the features they highlight and will try to deliver then a little bit in advance, planning them in the first minor releases of the second major release (e.g., to get it ready in the FI-WARE Testbed either by end of October 2012 or end of January 2013). Doing so, we are showing we care about their priorities and show some flexibility. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Chief Architect You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx _______________________________________________ Fiware-wpa mailing list Fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fla at tid.es Wed Mar 7 08:17:48 2012 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 08:17:48 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today Message-ID: Deal Alex et all, I cannot attend the phone conference today. Send me anything that you would need. Fernando. Enviado desde mi HTC ----- Reply message ----- De: "Alex Glikson" Fecha: mar., mar. 6, 2012 21:55 Asunto: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today Para: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Dear all, I've refactored a bit the roadmap page -- added more content (incorporating the feedback I've received by now), removed GE-oriented headings, etc. Please, take a look, send me your comments, and be ready for a detailed discussion/review tomorrow at our weekly call. Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 05/03/2012 06:13 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Draft contribution to Technical Roadmap -- due EOB today Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ All, This is to remind you to send me your draft contribution for the Roadmap deliverable by the end of the day today. You can find a place-holder at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/FiwareDeliverableD2.4Cloud Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" , Date: 01/03/2012 09:32 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] fi-ware cloud weekly 1/3 - minutes Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ att:Alex, Oshrit, David, Javier, Fernando, Pascal agenda: - arch spec: copied to the public wiki, except for Monitoring. last deadline next Tue. - sprints: need to update the tracker - roadmap: - SM [Fernando]: - 1st release: life cycle of a services (vApps) with OS API. Also some basic OS operations (servers, images, flavors, etc). OCCI adapter. Monitoring?? - 2nd: rebuild server, create image, elasticity & monitoring. - Cloud Edge [Pascal]: - 1st release: API for managing the life cycle of 'containers' (deploy, start/stop/etc) - 2nd: images, users. capabilities? - 3rd: monitoring API - Portal: basic user portal, integration with OS API and Keystone, monitoring dashboard? anything else? 2nd: admin portal (resource management, capacity, etc), advanced SM capabilities (elasticity, etc), other? Action Items: 1. Everyone, by Wednesday: update the tracker (sprints 1.2.1 and 1.2.2) 2. Everyone, by Monday: check arch spec at the public wiki 3. Everyone, by Monday: send out contribution to the roadmap deliverable. Instructions at https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fi-ware-private/index.php/How_to_write_down_the_Technical_Roadmap_Deliverable _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Wed Mar 14 09:09:08 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:09:08 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] tomorrow's weekly call Message-ID: Hi everyone, Any topics for tomorrow's weekly call? If not, we may skip this one.. Regards, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Wed Mar 14 14:40:41 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:40:41 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] meeting Message-ID: Hi all, Seems that we don't have anything urgent on the agenda for today, and few folks are out.. Let's cancel for today. Regards, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr Fri Mar 16 10:20:52 2012 From: lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr (Lorenzo Cantelmi) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:20:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Results of ITU Focus Group on Cloud Computing are published In-Reply-To: <2076735551.476414.1331888090782.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: <771662694.477525.1331889652778.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Hi all, I would like to share with you this technical report about Cloud Computing by ITU. It seems interesting since ITU uses to deal with communication and standardization at any level of the stack. So, it could be a good feedback about what is already done in FI-ware project. http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/cloud/Documents/FG-coud-technical-report.zip Hope you will find it interesting, as well. Regards, Lorenzo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrewx.edmonds at intel.com Fri Mar 16 11:43:28 2012 From: andrewx.edmonds at intel.com (Edmonds, AndrewX) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:43:28 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Results of ITU Focus Group on Cloud Computing are published In-Reply-To: <771662694.477525.1331889652778.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> References: <2076735551.476414.1331888090782.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> <771662694.477525.1331889652778.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: <332A51FC2924EE4A8CDD5BB4BB05CE191866A820@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> I reviewed this last night also and found it to be terribly out of date/sync even though it was only just published. For example, OCCI is only mentioned with respect to a use case document and CIMI is not even in there. The NIST documents are more up to date and comprehensive e.g. [1]. Andy [1] http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=909024 From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Lorenzo Cantelmi Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 9:21 AM To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Results of ITU Focus Group on Cloud Computing are published Hi all, I would like to share with you this technical report about Cloud Computing by ITU. It seems interesting since ITU uses to deal with communication and standardization at any level of the stack. So, it could be a good feedback about what is already done in FI-ware project. http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/cloud/Documents/FG-coud-technical-report.zip Hope you will find it interesting, as well. Regards, Lorenzo ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr Wed Mar 21 11:03:49 2012 From: lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr (Lorenzo Cantelmi) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:03:49 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: <1171622595.547844.1332323516827.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: <2057774659.548271.1332324229106.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: ? in t he Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; ? in the FIware Extensions [ here ], at 2. point it is probably tpc , instead of tcp ; ? in the Components subsection [ here ], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; ? about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). ? we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 ( III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS , that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service , to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Wed Mar 21 11:40:18 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:40:18 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: <2057774659.548271.1332324229106.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> References: <1171622595.547844.1332323516827.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> <2057774659.548271.1332324229106.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: Lorenzo, Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline below. Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! Regards, Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, Cc: Denis Caromel Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning NIST for the first time. in the FIware Extensions [here], at 2. point it is probably tpc, instead of tcp; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context). in the Components subsection [here], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal -- can you, please, take a look? we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 (III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS, that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service, to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the second release anyway). Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo_______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr Wed Mar 21 12:29:26 2012 From: lorenzo.cantelmi at inria.fr (Lorenzo Cantelmi) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:29:26 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Alex, thanks for having appreciated it. :-) . Just to be clearer than before: ? ok , TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context) , but in the same part is mentioned as Trusted Pool Computing (so tpc should be right. Moreover, tcp should create misunderstanding with TCP protocol acronym ); ? It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. Maybe I was not so clear in what I meant (sorry for that): nowadays, if a router fails you can still do stuff on your local host (i.e. laptop, etc), but for instance if you are working locally with your vApp, hosted on your cloud proxy, and then HW fails, you can not continue doing your stuff at all. Regards, Lorenzo ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Glikson" > To: "Lorenzo Cantelmi" > Cc: "Denis Caromel" , > fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu > Sent: Wednesday, 21 March, 2012 11:40:18 AM > Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions > Lorenzo, > Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually > reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline > below. > Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! > Regards, > Alex > From: Lorenzo Cantelmi > To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, > Cc: Denis Caromel > Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM > Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions > Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu > Hi all, > I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: > ? in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the > reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within > individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning > NIST for the first time. > ? in the FIware Extensions [ here ], at 2. point it is probably tpc , > instead of tcp ; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this > context). > ? in the Components subsection [ here ], at bullet Provisioning it is > written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions > that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from > the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando > -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. > ? about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved > till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) > will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and > can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of > that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure > redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular > 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I > agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a > good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal > -- can you, please, take a look? > ? we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical > Report Part 1 ( III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - > 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we > should speak of 2QoS , that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service > , to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. > I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for > me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to > invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't > necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major > innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority > for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update > the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the > second release anyway). > Let me know your kind opinions. > Ciao, > Lorenzo _______________________________________________ > Fiware-cloud mailing list > Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu > http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Wed Mar 21 14:20:51 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:20:51 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> References: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: Regarding the cloud proxy.. Well, I guess it depends on your reference for comparison. If you compare to 'regular' cloud-based application, you have code running on the 'client' device (could be Web browser, or something else), and code running in the 'cloud'. When your router dies, you lose connectivity to the cloud, and hence what is left is the code running on the client side, and the ability to continue working with the application depends on the capabilities of the client-side code (ranging from total outage to being able to fully continue in a disconnected mode). Now, depending on the exact assumptions regarding the role of 'cloud proxy' in this scenario -- you may or may not require 'enhanced' availability. Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Cc: Denis Caromel , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Date: 21/03/2012 01:29 PM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Alex, thanks for having appreciated it. :-) . Just to be clearer than before: ok, TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context), but in the same part is mentioned as Trusted Pool Computing (so tpc should be right. Moreover, tcp should create misunderstanding with TCP protocol acronym); It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. Maybe I was not so clear in what I meant (sorry for that): nowadays, if a router fails you can still do stuff on your local host (i.e. laptop, etc), but for instance if you are working locally with your vApp, hosted on your cloud proxy, and then HW fails, you can not continue doing your stuff at all. Regards, Lorenzo From: "Alex Glikson" To: "Lorenzo Cantelmi" Cc: "Denis Caromel" , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Sent: Wednesday, 21 March, 2012 11:40:18 AM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Lorenzo, Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline below. Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! Regards, Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, Cc: Denis Caromel Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning NIST for the first time. in the FIware Extensions [here], at 2. point it is probably tpc, instead of tcp; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context). in the Components subsection [here], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal -- can you, please, take a look? we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 (III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS, that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service, to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the second release anyway). Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo_______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Wed Mar 21 14:23:44 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:23:44 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] agenda for today's call Message-ID: Dear all, FYI, the main topic on the agenda for today's call is the integration between Developer Tools (IDE from WP9) and Cloud GEs. Of course, if anyone has other topics -- feel free to speak up. Regards, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From henk.heijnen at technicolor.com Wed Mar 21 14:54:00 2012 From: henk.heijnen at technicolor.com (Heijnen Henk) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:54:00 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: References: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> Message-ID: <189C15C1ADF61544BD5A11DCE7D5C500020E855994@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> Hello, One of the goals of the cloud edge is to be able to maintain some local activity even if the data link is down (simple example: if you have a heating / airco management running in the cloud (with nice server features, a link with the weather forecast etc ...), you want to be sure that in case the link falls down, your local device (the cloud edge) can continue to control the local devices and, at least works on maintaining the programmed temperature). To answer to another question about redundancy (power supply or HD), I would say that we must keep in mind that we are speaking about consumer electronics grade devices. A low cost is one of the main points when designing such devices and therefore, I don't think we can afford such extra features ... Regards H Henk HEIJNEN Manager, Cooperative Projects - Digital Delivery Coordinator [cid:image001.jpg at 01CD0772.73038890] [cid:image002.png at 01CD0772.73038890] Technology & Research Funded & Cooperative Programs 1, Avenue de Belle Fontaine - CS 17616 35576 Cesson-S?vign? cedex - FRANCE T?l: +33 2 99 27 33 08 - GSM: +33 6 72 39 26 24 From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: mercredi 21 mars 2012 14:21 To: Lorenzo Cantelmi Cc: Denis Caromel; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Regarding the cloud proxy.. Well, I guess it depends on your reference for comparison. If you compare to 'regular' cloud-based application, you have code running on the 'client' device (could be Web browser, or something else), and code running in the 'cloud'. When your router dies, you lose connectivity to the cloud, and hence what is left is the code running on the client side, and the ability to continue working with the application depends on the capabilities of the client-side code (ranging from total outage to being able to fully continue in a disconnected mode). Now, depending on the exact assumptions regarding the role of 'cloud proxy' in this scenario -- you may or may not require 'enhanced' availability. Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Cc: Denis Caromel , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Date: 21/03/2012 01:29 PM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions ________________________________ Alex, thanks for having appreciated it. :-) . Just to be clearer than before: * ok, TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context), but in the same part is mentioned as Trusted Pool Computing (so tpc should be right. Moreover, tcp should create misunderstanding with TCP protocol acronym); * It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. Maybe I was not so clear in what I meant (sorry for that): nowadays, if a router fails you can still do stuff on your local host (i.e. laptop, etc), but for instance if you are working locally with your vApp, hosted on your cloud proxy, and then HW fails, you can not continue doing your stuff at all. Regards, Lorenzo ________________________________ From: "Alex Glikson" To: "Lorenzo Cantelmi" Cc: "Denis Caromel" , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Sent: Wednesday, 21 March, 2012 11:40:18 AM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Lorenzo, Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline below. Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! Regards, Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, Cc: Denis Caromel Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: * in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning NIST for the first time. * in the FIware Extensions [here], at 2. point it is probably tpc, instead of tcp; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context). * in the Components subsection [here], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. * about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal -- can you, please, take a look? * we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 (III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS, that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service, to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the second release anyway). Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo_______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16662 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 2226 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Fri Mar 23 15:39:03 2012 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:39:03 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: <189C15C1ADF61544BD5A11DCE7D5C500020E855994@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> References: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> <189C15C1ADF61544BD5A11DCE7D5C500020E855994@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> Message-ID: Hi Henk, all, I understand that the current Technicolor's approach is to focus on the consumer market. However, I think we agreed that in FI-WARE the focus will be broader, and will cover also use-cases of cloud edge devices installed in organizations (e.g., SMEs). In those cases, the tradeoff between price and other capabilities (such as availability, performance, capacity, etc) may be different. Although I don't expect this to be a high priority in the short-term, I think we definitely should address this in the longer term. Regards, Alex From: Heijnen Henk To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Lorenzo Cantelmi , Cc: Denis Caromel , "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 21/03/2012 03:57 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Hello, One of the goals of the cloud edge is to be able to maintain some local activity even if the data link is down (simple example: if you have a heating / airco management running in the cloud (with nice server features, a link with the weather forecast etc ?), you want to be sure that in case the link falls down, your local device (the cloud edge) can continue to control the local devices and, at least works on maintaining the programmed temperature). To answer to another question about redundancy (power supply or HD), I would say that we must keep in mind that we are speaking about consumer electronics grade devices. A low cost is one of the main points when designing such devices and therefore, I don?t think we can afford such extra features ? Regards H Henk HEIJNEN Manager, Cooperative Projects - Digital Delivery Coordinator Technology & Research Funded & Cooperative Programs 1, Avenue de Belle Fontaine - CS 17616 35576 Cesson-S?vign? cedex - FRANCE T?l: +33 2 99 27 33 08 - GSM: +33 6 72 39 26 24 From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [ mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: mercredi 21 mars 2012 14:21 To: Lorenzo Cantelmi Cc: Denis Caromel; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Regarding the cloud proxy.. Well, I guess it depends on your reference for comparison. If you compare to 'regular' cloud-based application, you have code running on the 'client' device (could be Web browser, or something else), and code running in the 'cloud'. When your router dies, you lose connectivity to the cloud, and hence what is left is the code running on the client side, and the ability to continue working with the application depends on the capabilities of the client-side code (ranging from total outage to being able to fully continue in a disconnected mode). Now, depending on the exact assumptions regarding the role of 'cloud proxy' in this scenario -- you may or may not require 'enhanced' availability. Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Cc: Denis Caromel , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Date: 21/03/2012 01:29 PM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Alex, thanks for having appreciated it. :-) . Just to be clearer than before: ok, TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context), but in the same part is mentioned as Trusted Pool Computing (so tpc should be right. Moreover, tcp should create misunderstanding with TCP protocol acronym); It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. Maybe I was not so clear in what I meant (sorry for that): nowadays, if a router fails you can still do stuff on your local host (i.e. laptop, etc), but for instance if you are working locally with your vApp, hosted on your cloud proxy, and then HW fails, you can not continue doing your stuff at all. Regards, Lorenzo From: "Alex Glikson" To: "Lorenzo Cantelmi" Cc: "Denis Caromel" , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Sent: Wednesday, 21 March, 2012 11:40:18 AM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Lorenzo, Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline below. Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! Regards, Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, Cc: Denis Caromel Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning NIST for the first time. in the FIware Extensions [here], at 2. point it is probably tpc, instead of tcp; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context). in the Components subsection [here], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal -- can you, please, take a look? we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 (III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS, that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service, to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the second release anyway). Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo_______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 16662 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 2226 bytes Desc: not available URL: From henk.heijnen at technicolor.com Fri Mar 23 15:55:01 2012 From: henk.heijnen at technicolor.com (Heijnen Henk) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:55:01 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions In-Reply-To: References: <1550975203.551140.1332329366818.JavaMail.root@zmbs2.inria.fr> <189C15C1ADF61544BD5A11DCE7D5C500020E855994@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> Message-ID: <189C15C1ADF61544BD5A11DCE7D5C500020E90B3F2@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> Hello Alex, You're right ! One of the use cases that asked for a cloud edge is, for example, the one that deals with transportation... H Henk HEIJNEN Manager, Cooperative Projects - Digital Delivery Coordinator [cid:image001.jpg at 01CD090D.4E331D90] [cid:image002.png at 01CD090D.4E331D90] Technology & Research Funded & Cooperative Programs 1, Avenue de Belle Fontaine - CS 17616 35576 Cesson-S?vign? cedex - FRANCE T?l: +33 2 99 27 33 08 - GSM: +33 6 72 39 26 24 From: Alex Glikson [mailto:GLIKSON at il.ibm.com] Sent: vendredi 23 mars 2012 15:39 To: Heijnen Henk Cc: Denis Caromel; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Hi Henk, all, I understand that the current Technicolor's approach is to focus on the consumer market. However, I think we agreed that in FI-WARE the focus will be broader, and will cover also use-cases of cloud edge devices installed in organizations (e.g., SMEs). In those cases, the tradeoff between price and other capabilities (such as availability, performance, capacity, etc) may be different. Although I don't expect this to be a high priority in the short-term, I think we definitely should address this in the longer term. Regards, Alex From: Heijnen Henk To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Lorenzo Cantelmi , Cc: Denis Caromel , "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 21/03/2012 03:57 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions ________________________________ Hello, One of the goals of the cloud edge is to be able to maintain some local activity even if the data link is down (simple example: if you have a heating / airco management running in the cloud (with nice server features, a link with the weather forecast etc ...), you want to be sure that in case the link falls down, your local device (the cloud edge) can continue to control the local devices and, at least works on maintaining the programmed temperature). To answer to another question about redundancy (power supply or HD), I would say that we must keep in mind that we are speaking about consumer electronics grade devices. A low cost is one of the main points when designing such devices and therefore, I don't think we can afford such extra features ... Regards H Henk HEIJNEN Manager, Cooperative Projects - Digital Delivery Coordinator [cid:image001.jpg at 01CD090D.4E331D90] [cid:image002.png at 01CD090D.4E331D90] Technology & Research Funded & Cooperative Programs 1, Avenue de Belle Fontaine - CS 17616 35576 Cesson-S?vign? cedex - FRANCE T?l: +33 2 99 27 33 08 - GSM: +33 6 72 39 26 24 From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: mercredi 21 mars 2012 14:21 To: Lorenzo Cantelmi Cc: Denis Caromel; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Regarding the cloud proxy.. Well, I guess it depends on your reference for comparison. If you compare to 'regular' cloud-based application, you have code running on the 'client' device (could be Web browser, or something else), and code running in the 'cloud'. When your router dies, you lose connectivity to the cloud, and hence what is left is the code running on the client side, and the ability to continue working with the application depends on the capabilities of the client-side code (ranging from total outage to being able to fully continue in a disconnected mode). Now, depending on the exact assumptions regarding the role of 'cloud proxy' in this scenario -- you may or may not require 'enhanced' availability. Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, Cc: Denis Caromel , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Date: 21/03/2012 01:29 PM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions ________________________________ Alex, thanks for having appreciated it. :-) . Just to be clearer than before: * ok, TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context), but in the same part is mentioned as Trusted Pool Computing (so tpc should be right. Moreover, tcp should create misunderstanding with TCP protocol acronym); * It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. Maybe I was not so clear in what I meant (sorry for that): nowadays, if a router fails you can still do stuff on your local host (i.e. laptop, etc), but for instance if you are working locally with your vApp, hosted on your cloud proxy, and then HW fails, you can not continue doing your stuff at all. Regards, Lorenzo ________________________________ From: "Alex Glikson" To: "Lorenzo Cantelmi" Cc: "Denis Caromel" , fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu Sent: Wednesday, 21 March, 2012 11:40:18 AM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Lorenzo, Thanks for your comments. Nice to know that someone is actually reading the documentation that we produce :-) See few comments inline below. Further comments/suggestions are more than welcome! Regards, Alex From: Lorenzo Cantelmi To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu, Cc: Denis Caromel Date: 21/03/2012 12:04 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] some suggestions Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ Hi all, I make my own humble suggestions for wiki, that could be interesting: * in the Guiding Design Principles at this page we should insert the reference to NIST Roadmap and similar; we have added links within individual paragraphs, but maybe should also add one when mentioning NIST for the first time. * in the FIware Extensions [here], at 2. point it is probably tpc, instead of tcp; TCP stands for Trusted Compute Pools (in this context). * in the Components subsection [here], at bullet Provisioning it is written that Provisioning is "responsible of deleting the actions that, it takes from the Action Queue", but you can not deduce it from the relative picture: basically a feedback arrow is missing; Fernando -- please, take a look if we need to update the diagram. * about Cloud Edge chapter, Cloud Proxy is basically a router evolved till application layer, a cloud consumer directly (via connection) will work with. So, assuming its hardware fails, consumer is stuck and can not work with deployed applications/services. In the light of that, I guess we should specify that cloud proxy should assure redundancy HW (supply, hdd, etc). It is also the case for regular 'router' -- if it dies, you can not access the Internet at all. But I agree that specifying some design principles for Cloud Edge could be a good idea, including availability/ resiliency considerations. Pascal -- can you, please, take a look? * we use to speak about QoS, but, according with FG Cloud Technical Report Part 1 (III.2 Details on SLA measurement subsection, page 54 - 59 if we consider the offset), in such a new cloud environment we should speak of 2QoS, that stands for Quality and Quantity of Service, to remark the evolution/innovation of the scenario we are offering. I don not know if this acronym is already in use, but sounds good for me. what do you think about? I'm not sure how much will we be able to invest in the direction within the current scope -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to create the perception that we plan major innovation in this direction. In any case, this is not a high priority for the first release. If it changes -- it would make sense to update the corresponding description (which will be updated towards the second release anyway). Let me know your kind opinions. Ciao, Lorenzo_______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16662 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 2226 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From fla at tid.es Tue Mar 27 12:38:21 2012 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:38:21 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fwd: Call for Papers Cloudcomp 2012 References: <201203270833.q2R8X2Bc025354@web2.icstweb.eu> Message-ID: FYI Fernando L?pez Aguilar Cloud Computing fla at tid dot es +34 914 832 729 Telef?nica I+D (R&D) Ronda de la Comunicaci?n s/n Distrito C, Edificio Oeste 1, Planta 5 28050 Madrid, Spain [cid:65E3CA3A-3DFE-41B6-8F69-2AD965EA42FA at hi.inet] Inicio del mensaje reenviado: De: EAI Events > Fecha: 27 de marzo de 2012 10:33:02 GMT+02:00 Asunto: Call for Papers Cloudcomp 2012 Responder a: EAI Events > ===================================================================== 3rd International Conference on Cloud Computing - Cloudcomp 2012 24th and 26th September 2012 Wien, Austria http://www.cloudcomp.eu/ ===================================================================== HIGHLIGHTS - The event is endorsed by the European Alliance for Innovation (www.eai.eu), a leading community-based organisation devoted to the advancement of innovation in the field of ICT. - All accepted papers will be published by Springer and made available through SpringerLink Digital Library, one of the world's largest scientific libraries - Proceedings will be submitted for indexing by Google Scholar, ISI, EI Compendex, Scopus and many more CALL FOR PAPERS [Scope] Cloud Computing, which is envisioned to change the IT landscape, is consumer/delivery model where IT capabilities are offered as services billed based on usage. Examples of cloud services include, but are not limited to, IaaS (Infrastructure-as-a-Service), PaaS (Platform-as-a-Service) and SaaS (Software-as-a-Service). The underlying cloud architecture includes a pool of virtualized compute, storage and networking resources that can be aggregated and launched as platforms to run workloads and satisfy their Service-Level Agreement (SLA). Cloud architectures also include provisions to best guarantee service delivery for clients and at the same time optimize efficiency of resources of providers. Examples of provisions include, but are not limited to, elasticity through up/down scaling of resources to track workload behavior, extensive monitoring, failure mitigation, and energy optimizations. The two main technologies enabling clouds are: (i) Virtualization, the foundation of clouds; and (ii) manageability (autonomics), the command and control of clouds. CloudComp is intended to bring together researchers, developers, and industry professionals to discuss recent advances and experiences in clouds, cloud computing and related ecosystems and business support. The conference also aims at presenting the recent advances, experiences and results obtained in the wider area of cloud computing, giving users and researchers equally a chance to gain better insight into the capabilities and limitations of current cloud systems. [Topics] CloudComp will offer a chance to cloud providers to promote and display their current systems. To that end, papers are solicited from all cloud related areas, including, but not limited to: -Cloud architectures & provisions to optimize providers' environments while guaranteeing clients' SLAs -Programming models, applications and middleware suitable for dynamic cloud environments -End-to-end techniques for autonomic management of cloud resources including monitoring, asset management, process automation and others -Cloud delivery models, models' optimizations and associated architectural changes -Cloud economic and billing models -Green ICT and Clouds - theory, practice and experiences -Cloud security, privacy and compliance challenges -Toolkits, frameworks and processes to enable clouds and allow seamless transitions from traditional IT environments to clouds -Experiences with existing cloud infrastructure, services and uses -Novel human interfaces and browsers for accessing clouds -Interaction of mobile computing, mCommerce and Clouds -Standardisation activity in Clouds - proposals and experiences -Experiences on clouds in various vertical sectors (e.g., eScience and industry), where the concept worked/didnotwork. -Clouds Adaptability [Workshop proposals] The CloudComp 2012 conference caters for a limited number of workshops on dedicated session topics. Such topics may be, but are not limited to - Cloud Security - Cloud Programming models - High Performance Clouds - New Cloud Business Models A proposal to organise a workshop should include the following information: (1) the title of the workshop, (2) name, affiliation and contact details of the organiser, (3) an abstract of no more than one page describing the aims of the workshop and the motivation for holding it and participating to it (target audience), (4) a workshop chair and a tentative list of participants / speakers, (5) the expected duration of the workshop. Workshop sessions are expected to last 90-120 minutes, but a workshop may comprise multiple sessions. For submission instructions, please check the conference website. [Publications] Accepted papers will be published in the CloudComp Conference Proceedings and by Springer-Verlag in the Lecture Notes of ICST (LNICST). The proceedings will be available both in book form and via the SpringerLink digital library, which is one of the largest digital libraries online and covers a variety of scientific disciplines. LNICST volumes are submitted for inclusion to leading indexing services, including DBLP, Google Scholar, ACM Digital Library, ISI Proceedings, EI Engineering Index, CrossRef, Scopus and Zentralblatt Math, as well as EU Digital Library (EUDL)... but we don't stop at supporting the traditional indexing services: to increase attention and probability of citation of your article in Web 2.0, EAI supports innovative web tools that enable researchers to better share, classify and disseminate articles via the many different social bookmarking and networking services. As an example of this, learn about UCount, a community-based approach for measuring scientif! ic reputation. We are keen to have your feedback on these issues - your experience with the new tools and opportunities we are providing, and your thoughts and ideas for what additional features you would like to see. [Paper submission] Papers should be no more than 10000 words or 10 pages in length. Submissions will be reviewed anonymously by at least 3 reviewers. Papers will be judged on originality, correctness, clarity and relevance. Submitted papers must be original work, and may not be under consideration for another conference or journal. Submission of the paper implies agreement of the author(s) to attend the conference and present the paper if accepted Complete formatting and submission instructions for papers and workshops proposals can be found on the conference web site http://cloudcomp.eu/2012/show/initial-submission [Important dates] Workshops proposals deadline: 13th April, 2012 Paper submission due: 8th June, 2012 Notification of acceptance: 2nd July, 2012 Camera-ready deadline: 10th August, 2012 [Conference Organizing commitee] General Chair: Keith Jeffery, Science and Technology Facilities Council, UK TPC Chairs: Lutz Schubert High performance computing centre, Germany Mazin Yousif, Head of Architecture (RDS), T-Systems, International Local Chair: Ivona Brandic, Distributed Systems Group Information Systems Institute Vienna University of Technology, Austria ABOUT EAI The European Alliance for Innovation is a dynamic eco-system for fostering ICT enabled innovation to improve European competitiveness and to benefit society. EAI uses open e-platforms to inspire grassroots collaboration among all relevant actors, from organizations to individuals, to stimulate community driven innovation to its institutional and individual members worldwide. Through EAI, organizations find ideas and talent, and individual innovators find organizations for their ingenuity and craft. Join the innovation community at www.eai.eu UNSUBSCRIBE If you believed you have received this email in error, or do not want to receive emails from us in the future, please send an email to unsubscribe at eai.eu ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 66394 bytes Desc: PastedGraphic-1.tiff URL: