Hi, Can we respond to this question from Dennis (ENVIROFI) ? I guess he's asking about the validation questionnaire but it would be worth to interact with them and ask ... Sorry but I don't have enough time at this moment ... Cheers, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es<http://www.tid.es> email: jhierro at tid.es<mailto: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 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: AW: Feedback on testbed from ENVIROFI Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:32:26 +0000 From: Havlik Denis <Denis.Havlik at ait.ac.at><mailto:Denis.Havlik at ait.ac.at> To: Juanjo Hierro <jhierro at tid.es><mailto:jhierro at tid.es> CC: Arne Berre (Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no<mailto:Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no>) <Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no><mailto:Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no>, Stefano De Panfilis <depa at mail.eng.it><mailto:depa at mail.eng.it> Hi Juanjo, I only sent the stuff to you. I will ask the folks to give me an update in the same form now. Do you have a more elaborated form for testing already? Regards Denis PS: I can't make it to Sarbrücken. Can I join over skype or phone? Von: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 08. November 2012 07:42 An: Havlik Denis Cc: Arne Berre (Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no<mailto:Arne.J.Berre at sintef.no>); Stefano De Panfilis; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Betreff: Re: AW: Feedback on testbed from ENVIROFI Hi Denis, I would like to catch up with you here regarding submission of the initial survey we sent to you for collecting early feedback regarding usage of the FI-WARE Testbed ... Did you send it already ? If not, I guess that it may deserve some update given the fact that some of the issues you raised had been addressed (I hope ;-) Could you please send/re-send it ? Many thanks, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es<http://www.tid.es> email: jhierro at tid.es<mailto: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 On 19/10/12 11:21, Havlik Denis wrote: Hi Juanjo, Thanks for your feedback. I answer some of your questions between lines of your original email. As you said in one of your previous emails: "please don't get offended by terse and somewhat rude language above. I'm in a hurry & therefore try to get the basic info out in shortest possible form." :-) I would add ... "overall because I have learned over time that Spaniards sound too straight and rude". Besides, as Mark Twain said "sorry for the length of the message but I didn't have time" :-) Jeah, one has to get used to this type of things and stop thinking people are just trying to piss him off. Can be difficult from time to time, I know. :) When did you ask for access ? ... One thing that we have experienced is that we asked UC projects to provide info that would enable them to access GEs deployed on the FI-WARE Testbed early in August (mail sent to the ab/all at fi-ppp.eu<mailto:ab/all at fi-ppp.eu> by Stefano on August 9th) but didn't receive their formal request to get access to the Testbed until second half of September (and, of course, right after that they expected to receive an immediate response :-). I'm afraid we certainly weren't the first to demand access, but it was somewhere in the first half of September. Honestly, I did not count with weeks of delay. My only concern is that we end delivering a too negative impression to the EC which may let them conclude that the whole FI-PPP is a disaster (when the fact is that many things had gone much better if they had simply designed the programme a bit better as to go a bit more relaxed with the timings ... it would be fair to ask them now for a bit of patience because they were the ones who created the problem in the first place :-) Yes, this is why I sent the report only to you. It's not the type of message I want to send to EU. The stupid part is: we made quite a progress, e.g. concerning the Complex Event Processing which we did not plan to use at first but have now after some fruitful exchange of mails with Guy. But we can't proceed without access to services. 1) We (AIT) wanted to deploy our "MDAF" backend for mobile devices on your cloud server, but your "cloud hosting" chapter is still empty http://catalogue.fi-ware.eu/enablers?chapter_tid=2, so I presume we can't do this. We plan to announce availability of the Cloud this week. Issue is that we are trying to see whether we can go from the beginning with a more complete (although still a bit unastable) set of Cloud GEs or we should stay with something we feel can be more stable (what we show you in Tel-Aviv). I plan to make a decision on going one way or the other this Thursday-Friday so that we can announce availability of the Cloud by end of this week. I understand we should be able to use this one now. 2) Even if we do, we can't have this server protected by "IP-range" since the mobile devices need to access it. This is something we plan to solve and we will explain to you what we have designed as a short-term solution as well as a mid-long term solution during the FI-PPP AB confcall tomorrow. Sorry, I had to be on a training yesterday. I've seen the slides though and Herman tells me he's seen the service interface. Unfortunately, this is one good example about how "pressure" by the EC in how we should drive things in FI-WARE, plus the decision to start FI-WARE and UC projects at the same time, have led to problems. You cannot imagine how much the EC had put pressure on FI-WARE to make sure we "were driven by the needs of the UC projects". Their argument was that, otherwise, we would be just "technology driven". This position by the EC created an overreaction in some of the chapter teams in FI-WARE who adopted a position which may be summarized as "I will focus for the 1st Release on a) things that I can deliver easily, in order to allow UC projects to start playing, as well as b) things explicitly requested by the UC projects (through the Theme/Epic/Feature requests backlog)". The Security team, for example, decided that GEs that would allow to setup access control to APIs provided by GEs, based on OAuth for example, may be deferred to the 2nd Release of FI-WARE because "no UC project was actually demanding this as high priority". I would argue that probably you didn't demand this because you were expecting this to come "by default" (i.e., "built-in" or "by design" without the need to ask) but the fact is that nobody asked for it explicitly. I can tell you that I have argued several times internally that this had to be a high-priority feature in the 1st release but I always got the answer "UC projects Correct. Now, we have to survive to this mess and try to our best. Agree. Have we found that we should have taken care of providing a solid OAuth-based architecture to control access to FI-WARE APIs ? Fine, let's not blame each other why we didn't find it earlier and let's focus on providing a solution. Better now than later. Well, the key issue for me today is: can we get a virtual image without IP-control today or not? If yes, we can still install some of our enablers on the cloud, and then use the GEs quasi "locally". 3) Same is true for other services that need to be directly accessed by mobile phones. In particular the identity manager, the cloud storage and location service. With the solutions proposed we should be able to handle those scenarios you mention. OK, I did not quite understand what is the "proposed solution", but I hope this means that we should be able to access some of the GEs without IP-based control today or in a very near future. Cheers Denis ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más 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 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más 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: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-testbed/attachments/20121116/4ce16494/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy