A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic:=A0 clouds@ietf.org .=A0 <= /div>

=A0

We will send out information about a survey of the time to hold the ba= r BoF in Anaheim.=A0

=A0

Some of the discussion will focus on developing a reference framework = and defining the use cases for emerging cloud services. We also plan to tal= k about interfaces and protocol profiles including extensions (if needed) f= or implementing (provisioning/maintaining) these services over cloud-based = systems.

Please join this alias and come to the planned bar BoF if you are intere= sted in this topic.

Thank you.

Bhumip Khasnabish (vumip1@gmail.com)

Clouds bar BoF Convener

=A0

--0016e6d7ea6ee0d9890480167e29-- From dhc2@dcrocker.net Mon Feb 22 09:43:47 2010 Return-Path: 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 063DF3A7982; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:43:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 trhimMxPEd3q; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:43:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F243A7B32; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:43:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (ppp-67-124-90-197.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.124.90.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o1MHjZLn012079 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:45:40 -0800 Message-ID: <4B82C2C1.8060602@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:45:37 -0800 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/10432/Mon Feb 22 06:59:38 2010 on sbh17.songbird.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:45:40 -0800 (PST) Cc: clouds@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:43:47 -0000 On 2/22/2010 9:38 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >> A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic: > clouds@ietf.org . > Do you mean a mail list? Can you provide subscribe information? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Mon Feb 22 09:55:24 2010 Return-Path: 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 2A13228C1C9 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:55:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.984 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.984 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 iLbMpyFaOUrj for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:55:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C06228C173 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:55:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.158] (sn87.proper.com [75.101.18.87]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o1MHvGvW093862 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:57:21 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:56:16 -0800 To: clouds@ietf.org From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [clouds] Clouds and / vs. virtualization X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:55:24 -0000 Greetings. Before we get into provisioning, we need to know both what types of systems and what type of networks we are talking about. Now that "cloud" has become nearly meaningless as a marketing buzzword, we have an opportunity to define it for our own purposes. An earlier definition of "cloud" was a virtualized computer that was managed by an entity outside one's own enterprise. Later, "private clouds" were invented, which eliminated the "outside one's own enterprise" but also significantly changed the security model. Later still, "XaaY" (for many values of X and Y) latched onto the "cloud" buzzword, describing applications and services by themselves, not virtualized computers. An IETF effort that tries to cover XaaY seems doomed to failure due to over-generality, while wasting a lot of participant effort. Instead, I think defining a cloud as "one or more virtualized computers where many components of each computer are managed separately" gives us a reasonable basis from which to work on how to provision such clouds and the networks over which the clouds run. Thoughts? --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium From timbray@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 10:11:42 2010 Return-Path: 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 B4BE83A7982 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:11:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] 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 6j961nCoe04H for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:11:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1373A79A3 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:10:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by gwb10 with SMTP id 10so617268gwb.31 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:12:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=A7VON+K13kH2NgRg2PeDksoWAjuLpWWKOj/bkYSWaug=; b=uwEp3dE14nsAY8BvngxJ4e2Ji6UbFM21Ty88W8EtWOvsfiNHlhhsLLo2yKVLuW6PA7 RO7w4cMYCK2jZT2sI153MCAiePKVykATw+8O26JAEPgby7vcaKpd5a43ixMeCRUgAkqF DlEgmALWFNxXTZtcZ1E80/j87urCJG2UACpJQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=d/cJn23oZLfdi83soX5Vne+rvA36yLhC+BkJZQ0IWU1WJ+4c6yvPUcIOdCpkfBl8dW vH5aqsOvRMFB8xFrDG25CoHwDaWSAgeWtpjuT2IJoQG82jTMCi2CZd97JFoaZLLp1xZg sAuT8zfh7YtgHN89nwUUesi5lHfwjp7Dwakok= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: timbray@gmail.com Received: by 10.91.18.5 with SMTP id v5mr1757036agi.62.1266862340863; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:12:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:12:20 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0ba6a3522bf59bea Message-ID: <517bf111002221012q622903bcl46a4ea5833304521@mail.gmail.com> From: Tim Bray To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Clouds and / vs. virtualization X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: tbray@textuality.com List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:11:42 -0000 On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote= : > > An earlier definition of "cloud" was a virtualized computer that was mana= ged by an entity outside one's own enterprise. Later, "private clouds" were= invented, which eliminated the "outside one's own enterprise" but also sig= nificantly changed the security model. Later still, "XaaY" (for many values= of X and Y) latched onto the "cloud" buzzword, describing applications and= services by themselves, not virtualized computers. I think there's reasonably good agreement on the values of X and Y. =A0Y is "S". =A0X is I for infrastructure, meaning roughly "like what Amazon does", P for Platform, meaning roughly "like what Google App Engine and Heroku do", and S for Software meaning roughly "like what Salesforce.com does". I'm not convinced that there's a value-add for the IETF here, but if there were, it'd be at the IaaS level. > An IETF effort that tries to cover XaaY seems doomed to failure due to ov= er-generality, while wasting a lot of participant effort. Instead, I think = defining a cloud as "one or more virtualized computers where many component= s of each computer are managed separately" gives us a reasonable basis from= which to work on how to provision such clouds and the networks over which = the clouds run. The big value of IaaS is that it lets you fire up servers and configure them without involving Mordac the Preventer of=A0IT, using only some Web forms and your credit card. Amazon's API for doing this is kinda klunky, but tons of people are doing it anyhow so it's plausible that there really is a big market for this kind of stuff. Thus there are lots of proposals for APIs that are better and don't belong to anyone, and a handful of efforts under way in various standards orgs out there; a few are enumerated at http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/04/28/Cloud-Standards and also check out VMware's vCloud. -Tim From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Mon Feb 22 10:31:54 2010 Return-Path: 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 207C528C17B for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:31:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.985 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.985 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.061, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 KCdhWeAsimOo for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:31:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E371D28C342 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:31:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.158] (sn87.proper.com [75.101.18.87]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o1MIXnd5096907 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:33:51 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <517bf111002221012q622903bcl46a4ea5833304521@mail.gmail.com> References: <517bf111002221012q622903bcl46a4ea5833304521@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:33:48 -0800 To: tbray@textuality.com From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Clouds and / vs. virtualization X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:31:54 -0000 At 10:12 AM -0800 2/22/10, Tim Bray wrote: >On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> >> An earlier definition of "cloud" was a virtualized computer that was managed by an entity outside one's own enterprise. Later, "private clouds" were invented, which eliminated the "outside one's own enterprise" but also significantly changed the security model. Later still, "XaaY" (for many values of X and Y) latched onto the "cloud" buzzword, describing applications and services by themselves, not virtualized computers. > >I think there's reasonably good agreement on the values of X and Y. Y >is "S". X is I for infrastructure, meaning roughly "like what Amazon >does", P for Platform, meaning roughly "like what Google App Engine >and Heroku do", and S for Software meaning roughly "like what >Salesforce.com does". > >I'm not convinced that there's a value-add for the IETF here, but if >there were, it'd be at the IaaS level. I can buy IaaS; it is fairly close to the definition I proposed. > > An IETF effort that tries to cover XaaY seems doomed to failure due to over-generality, while wasting a lot of participant effort. Instead, I think defining a cloud as "one or more virtualized computers where many components of each computer are managed separately" gives us a reasonable basis from which to work on how to provision such clouds and the networks over which the clouds run. > >The big value of IaaS is that it lets you fire up servers and >configure them without involving Mordac the Preventer of IT, using >only some Web forms and your credit card. Amazon's API for doing this >is kinda klunky, but tons of people are doing it anyhow so it's >plausible that there really is a big market for this kind of stuff. Fully agree. >Thus there are lots of proposals for APIs that are better and don't >belong to anyone, and a handful of efforts under way in various >standards orgs out there; a few are enumerated at >http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/04/28/Cloud-Standards and >also check out VMware's vCloud. Deciding where to start the protocol work should start after we decide what the protocol is supposed to be about. When we get there, there are many good starting points. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium From shore@arsc.edu Mon Feb 22 12:58:04 2010 Return-Path: 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 A7D1D28C331; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:58:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] 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 XzTbrCB-y5fp; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:58:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from arsc.edu (mail1.arsc.edu [IPv6:2001:480:150:75::229]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E1A28C20B; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from viking-e0.arsc.edu (viking-e0.arsc.edu [IPv6:2001:480:150:860:223:32ff:feda:4a52]) by arsc.edu (20090828.ARSC) with ESMTP id o1MKxw8l004879; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:59:58 -0900 (AKST) Message-Id: From: Melinda Shore To: Brian E Carpenter In-Reply-To: <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:59:58 -0900 References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-CanIt-Geo: No geolocation information available for 2001:480:150:860:223:32ff:feda:4a52 X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-Canit-Stats-ID: Bayes signature not available X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on IPv6:2001:480:150:75::167 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, Michael Richardson , David Chadwick , ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:58:04 -0000 On Feb 22, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > My thought exactly. The distinction between cloud computing and open > grid > computing is very small (or possibly zero) With all due respect, Brian, it's really not. With cloud computing you're typically dealing with multitenanting issues and a bunch of other layer 8-9 stuff that tends (of necessity) to be reflected down the stack, and I think I can see an argument for cloud computing belonging in the RAI space, or at least having substantial overlap. The infrastructure aspects of it have implications for work that not only has not been done in the past but has actively been rejected in the past - see, for example, stuff around state transfer and management in the rserpool discussions. It's one thing to talk about network protocols for carrying stuff around but the {i,r}pc aspects of the work really have a lot more to do with computation than the IETF has historically undertaken. Melinda From dhc2@dcrocker.net Mon Feb 22 13:07:00 2010 Return-Path: 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 2E3EF28C32F; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:07:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 l3pGGF7YEmpY; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:06:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DC728C13B; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:06:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (ppp-67-124-90-197.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.124.90.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o1ML8axY029299 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:08:41 -0800 Message-ID: <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:08:38 -0800 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Melinda Shore References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/10433/Mon Feb 22 10:44:43 2010 on sbh17.songbird.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:08:42 -0800 (PST) Cc: clouds@ietf.org, Brian E Carpenter , David Chadwick , ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:07:00 -0000 On 2/22/2010 12:59 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: > On Feb 22, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> My thought exactly. The distinction between cloud computing and open grid >> computing is very small (or possibly zero) > > With all due respect, Brian, it's really not. With cloud > computing you're typically dealing with multitenanting issues > and a bunch of other layer 8-9 stuff that tends (of necessity) > to be reflected down the stack, and I think I can see an > argument for cloud computing belonging in the RAI space, > or at least having substantial overlap. Having recently gone through the exercise of trying to understand what these different terms actually meant, I discovered that the underlying problem is that you are both right, as are a variety of other people who have other views... As already noted, the term 'cloud' is now used in many different ways, including as a synonym for 'network' and for 'Internet', even amongst technical folk. (Really.) There are some people who have very specific and nuanced technical definitions, including distinguishing cloud from grid. But no set of definitions seems to have a broad base of support. For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was happy with the NIST language: d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From shore@arsc.edu Mon Feb 22 14:20:29 2010 Return-Path: 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 4EAC93A82A1; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:20:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] 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 vHVTE9mFqJXy; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:20:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from arsc.edu (mail1.arsc.edu [IPv6:2001:480:150:75::229]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF7E3A7656; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:20:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from viking-e0.arsc.edu (viking-e0.arsc.edu [IPv6:2001:480:150:860:223:32ff:feda:4a52]) by arsc.edu (20090828.ARSC) with ESMTP id o1MMMGWU010867; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:22:16 -0900 (AKST) Message-Id: <10A0F884-78AD-40D6-BE12-A56CF9339F90@arsc.edu> From: Melinda Shore To: dcrocker@bbiw.net In-Reply-To: <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:22:16 -0900 References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-CanIt-Geo: No geolocation information available for 2001:480:150:860:223:32ff:feda:4a52 X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-Canit-Stats-ID: Bayes signature not available X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on IPv6:2001:480:150:75::167 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, Brian E Carpenter , David Chadwick , ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:20:29 -0000 On Feb 22, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was > happy with the NIST language: I can live with that. Melinda From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Mon Feb 22 16:33:26 2010 Return-Path: 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 0651628C47E for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:33:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.986 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 IkqbGqsWpQP4 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:33:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9E728C44A for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:33:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.158] (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o1N0ZHSk017036 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:35:19 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:35:16 -0800 To: dcrocker@bbiw.net From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:33:26 -0000 At 1:08 PM -0800 2/22/10, Dave CROCKER wrote: >For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was happy with the NIST language: > > [ Disclaimer: I am working for NIST on a related document. ] The NIST definition is good for some environments, but it does not lend itself well to an IETF effort that will discuss provisioning, particularly the SaaS and PaaS parts. If we do not scope down more narrowly than "everything that can be virtualized", there is probably no reason to start work on how to provision that everything. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium From samj@samj.net Mon Feb 22 16:41:46 2010 Return-Path: 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 2A89A28C10B for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:41:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 gu8SSh6pot+k for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:41:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from eu1sys200aog108.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog108.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8DC653A7F0A for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:41:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from source ([209.85.220.216]) by eu1sys200aob108.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKS4MkwLLm9PrYwgLHx1ODY77Xuttf765e@postini.com; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:43:45 UTC Received: by fxm8 with SMTP id 8so755448fxm.8 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.185.8 with SMTP id a8mr1871941hbh.11.1266885823989; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:43:43 +0100 Message-ID: <21606dcf1002221643j34b8a06fubcc11a26ef09b687@mail.gmail.com> From: Sam Johnston To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f7962282894c048039d705 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:41:46 -0000 --001485f7962282894c048039d705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > At 1:08 PM -0800 2/22/10, Dave CROCKER wrote: > >For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was happy > with the NIST language: > > > > > > [ Disclaimer: I am working for NIST on a related document. ] > > The NIST definition is good for some environments, but it does not lend > itself well to an IETF effort that will discuss provisioning, particularly > the SaaS and PaaS parts. If we do not scope down more narrowly than > "everything that can be virtualized", there is probably no reason to start > work on how to provision that everything. > Agreed, the NIST document is not without its imperfections. It also hasn't evolved a great deal, which I think is less to do with having got it right from the start and more to do with having got it "right enough" for many. I would also suggest that virtualisation is a red herring in that there is a lot of focus here because that's where the legacy vendors are at (plus it's the low hanging fruit - basically compute, storage and network resources and not much else). Things start to get interesting when you look at platforms (structured storage, queues, runtimes and weird and wonderful contraptions like MTurk), and as for the application layer, that stretches as far and wide as you like. Sam --001485f7962282894c048039d705 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrot= e:

At 1:08 PM -0800 2/22/10, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decide= d it was happy with the NIST language:
>
> =A0 <http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SNS/cloud-com= puting/cloud-def-v15.doc>

[ Disclaimer: I am working for NIST on a related document. ]

The NIST definition is good for some environments, but it does not lend its= elf well to an IETF effort that will discuss provisioning, particularly the= SaaS and PaaS parts. If we do not scope down more narrowly than "ever= ything that can be virtualized", there is probably no reason to start = work on how to provision that everything.

Agreed, the NIST document is not without i= ts imperfections. It also hasn't evolved a great deal, which I think is= less to do with having got it right from the start and more to do with hav= ing got it "right enough" for many. I would also suggest that vir= tualisation is a red herring in that there is a lot of focus here because t= hat's where the legacy vendors are at (plus it's the low hanging fr= uit - basically compute, storage and network resources and not much else).<= /div>

Things start to get interesting when you look at platfo= rms (structured storage, queues, runtimes and weird and wonderful contrapti= ons like MTurk), and as for the application layer, that stretches as far an= d wide as you like.

Sam

--001485f7962282894c048039d705-- From timbray@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 16:43:16 2010 Return-Path: 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 E9F9028C473; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] 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 EYzlYpHsWVWD; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-f173.google.com (mail-yw0-f173.google.com [209.85.211.173]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A013A828B; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by ywh3 with SMTP id 3so1883819ywh.31 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:45:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UPkgd6X8SCQgbuTCL8zM0k9XexXKapbllEXumVQqCC4=; b=drFLqLe0e0JHhTmtY8SWCM1Oi7cbEVl/NUXgvgN4AsTdpPaSAggKaPD0XUyAcNg/Qe 56yDDEn26tnYOU8Eq0l9EPE2kl/8HxcX9n74VFyGN7Q8hGPl9Cb0yzqj7INK5QI9TlzB 2tLFd6p3sLhLfPMbRcjBkAZuiOYpAUWjN+u+Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=J4XY5ztigojrycOvEM4k6mFvq2gbOZESVzqYQhTxnS/MWZXhBKM+sE7pe/K2PbWvbY FNFr/FEkfTjRXBoqq5OtED8qPNK1E77W3x3b8cJXcDBoAAt2u/5UPgqrU1N2xy1LIIC+ eaEdZ9Kda5MiY6w5GLF66E6E7GX9x7lpqh2H4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: timbray@gmail.com Received: by 10.90.9.19 with SMTP id 19mr8019495agi.78.1266885913972; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:45:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B8323D1.8000601@gmail.com> References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> <4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> <4B8323D1.8000601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:45:13 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: f437a9e3eace68ab Message-ID: <517bf111002221645q1d8e84c9j2a26cd5f016a4912@mail.gmail.com> From: Tim Bray To: Scott Brim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Ole Jacobsen , ietf@ietf.org, clouds@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net, Brian E Carpenter , David Chadwick Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: tbray@textuality.com List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:43:17 -0000 > If you're proposing OGF you should look at the 6 or 7 other SDOs doing > useful work on clouds, e.g. the DMTF. =A0It's a complex situation. I would have said "ridiculous" actually. So much standards energy, so little shipping technology. -Tim From dhc2@dcrocker.net Mon Feb 22 16:50:10 2010 Return-Path: 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 6A15D28C47D for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:50:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 3EC5Qch97MGm for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF2A3A828B for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (ppp-67-124-90-197.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.124.90.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o1N0q3RL014622 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:52:08 -0800 Message-ID: <4B8326B5.4030405@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:52:05 -0800 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bhumip Khasnabish Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/10433/Mon Feb 22 10:44:43 2010 on sbh17.songbird.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:52:08 -0800 (PST) Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: [clouds] Cloudy focus X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:50:10 -0000 > From: Bhumip Khasnabish > > Some of the discussion will focus on developing a reference framework and > defining the use cases for emerging cloud services. We also plan to talk > about interfaces and protocol profiles including extensions (if needed) for > implementing (provisioning/maintaining) these services over cloud-based > systems. I think that the few postings, so far, underscore the need to have significant clarity and focus about the interest in pursuing any cloud work in the IETF. First, even basic definitions are already being debated. Second, as noted, there is already quite a bit of cloud standardization work being done elsewhere. This includes an entire mailing list devoted to use cases. So we probably do not need an IETF working group for that... Even if the initial set is discarded, we should start discussions with a statement of specific problems that need to be solved in the IETF, and why the existing efforts elsewhere are either inappropriate for the work or insufficient to them. Starting with something as general as you posted yesterday is likely to do little more than wander down paths of debate about definitions, theory and whether the bubbles in the beer constitute a cloud. I could imagine a number of pragmatic choices that are reasonable for the IETF, but don't know what you have in mind (and also, I don't know enough about existing cloud work to navigate choices.) d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From samj@samj.net Mon Feb 22 17:29:59 2010 Return-Path: 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 0E11D28C4B7 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 k8ZJVVCtoRlw for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:29:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from eu1sys200aog115.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog115.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.139]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 52BBB28C4C5 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:29:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from source ([209.85.220.219]) by eu1sys200aob115.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKS4MwDXeYN2d1dUUtAONJ6gB2I7ja054U@postini.com; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:31:58 UTC Received: by fxm19 with SMTP id 19so3186966fxm.1 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:31:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.153.71 with SMTP id y7mr1679372hbb.210.1266888716859; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:31:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B8326B5.4030405@dcrocker.net> References: <4B8326B5.4030405@dcrocker.net> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:31:56 +0100 Message-ID: <21606dcf1002221731o23124eb8lfab4924291023d37@mail.gmail.com> From: Sam Johnston To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f6cea2f03a2404803a83da Cc: clouds@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham Subject: Re: [clouds] Cloudy focus X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:29:59 -0000 --001485f6cea2f03a2404803a83da Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote: I think that the few postings, so far, underscore the need to have > significant clarity and focus about the interest in pursuing any cloud work > in the IETF. > <...> > Even if the initial set is discarded, we should start discussions with a > statement of specific problems that need to be solved in the IETF, and why > the existing efforts elsewhere are either inappropriate for the work or > insufficient to them. > Thanks for the pragmatism Dave. I've been patiently waiting for the IETF to take an interest in cloud while working on the OGF's OCCI for the best part of a year now. Having stared at the problem from every angle it occurs to me that there are two sensible ways forward: a. Treat everything as a feed (as we do at Google with GData aka AtomPub) and/or b. "Enhance" HTTP such that resources can be annotated (attributes), correlated (categories) and interrelated (links) out-of-band, without resorting to Atom/SOAP-style envelopes. Having had limited success selling Atom to the working group I later found that a lot of what we need can be done by tweaking HTTP, for example with Mark's draft-nottingham-http-link-header, my draft-johnston-http-category-header and either raw headers or a Set-Cookie style draft for attributes. This would allow others (like the OGF, DMTF, etc.) to create and animate arbitrarily complex models, leaving the payload "clean" for existing standard formats like OVF (in much the same way as the Internet currently caters for multiple image formats). It would also be incredibly useful for other traditional applications such as content management. Hopefully this gives you some ideas as to how the IETF might engage without treading on the toes of the (many) existing standards efforts. Sam --001485f6cea2f03a2404803a83da Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Dave CROCKER <dhc2@dcrocker.net> wrote:

<= br>

I think that the few postings, so far, underscore the need to have signific= ant clarity and focus about the interest in pursuing any cloud work in the = IETF.
<...>
Even if the initial set is discarded, we should start discussions with a st= atement of specific problems that need to be solved in the IETF, and why th= e existing efforts elsewhere are either inappropriate for the work or insuf= ficient to them.

Thanks for the pragmatism Dave.

I've been patiently waiting for the IETF to take an inte= rest in cloud while working on the OGF's OCCI for the best part of a year now. Having stared at the proble= m from every angle it occurs to me that there are two sensible ways forward= :

a. Treat everything as a feed (as we do at Google with = GData aka AtomPub) and/or

b. "Enhance" HTTP such that r= esources can be annotated (attributes), correlated (categories) and interre= lated (links) out-of-band, without resorting to Atom/SOAP-style envelopes.<= /div>

Having had limited success selling Atom to the working = group I later found that a lot of what we need can be done by tweaking HTTP= , for example with Mark's draft-nottingham-http-link-header,=A0my dra= ft-johnston-http-category-header=A0and either raw headers or a Set-Cook= ie style draft for attributes.

This would allow others (like the OGF, DMTF, etc.) to c= reate and animate arbitrarily complex models, leaving the payload "cle= an" for existing standard formats like OVF (in much the same way as th= e Internet currently caters for multiple image formats). It would also be i= ncredibly useful for other traditional applications such as content managem= ent.

Hopefully this gives you some ideas as to how the IETF = might engage without treading on the toes of the (many) existing standards = efforts.

Sam

--001485f6cea2f03a2404803a83da-- From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Feb 22 09:37:50 2010 Return-Path: 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 7D58628C18D; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:37:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.536 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.536 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] 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 2EywP+bq9+3r; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0447528C0EA; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:37:38 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,519,1262581200"; d="scan'208,217";a="177509148" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2010 12:39:30 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,519,1262581200"; d="scan'208,217";a="434262656" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.15]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2010 12:38:49 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CAB3E5.E0ACFD32" Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:38:42 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) Thread-Index: Acqz3BqhMjGHwIl+T0iQB06tTZBd3gACaXxg References: From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Bhumip Khasnabish" , X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:37:50 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CAB3E5.E0ACFD32 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic: clouds@ietf.org . =20 =20 Do you mean a mail list? Can you provide subscribe information?=20 =20 Thanks and Regards, =20 Dan =20 ________________________________ From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bhumip Khasnabish Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 8:34 AM To: ietf@ietf.org Cc: clouds@ietf.org Subject: Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) =09 =09 Dear All, We wish to inform you of the intent to have a bar BoF during the IETF-77 meeting in Anaheim, CA (_March 21-26, 2010_) on defining applications/services and their provisioning/management over cloud-based system (A/SPOCS). =20 A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic: clouds@ietf.org . =20 =20 We will send out information about a survey of the time to hold the bar BoF in Anaheim. =20 =09 =20 Some of the discussion will focus on developing a reference framework and defining the use cases for emerging cloud services. We also plan to talk about interfaces and protocol profiles including extensions (if needed) for implementing (provisioning/maintaining) these services over cloud-based systems. Please join this alias and come to the planned bar BoF if you are interested in this topic. Thank you. Bhumip Khasnabish (vumip1@gmail.com) Clouds bar BoF Convener =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CAB3E5.E0ACFD32 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>=20 A new alias has = been created=20 for discussion on this topic: clouds@ietf.org .

Do you=20 mean a mail list? Can you provide subscribe information? =

Thanks=20 and Regards,

Dan

From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bhumip=20 Khasnabish
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 8:34 = AM
To:=20 ietf@ietf.org
Cc: clouds@ietf.org
Subject: = Announcing=20 Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, = CA)

Dear All,

We wish to inform you of the intent to have a bar BoF during the = IETF-77=20 meeting in Anaheim, CA (_March 21-26, 2010_) on defining = applications/services=20 and their provisioning/management over cloud-based system = (A/SPOCS). =20

A new alias has been created for discussion on this = topic: clouds@ietf.org = .

We will send out information about a survey of the time to hold = the bar=20 BoF in Anaheim.

Some of the discussion will focus on developing a reference = framework and=20 defining the use cases for emerging cloud services. We also plan to = talk about=20 interfaces and protocol profiles including extensions (if needed) for=20 implementing (provisioning/maintaining) these services over = cloud-based=20 systems.

Please join this alias and come to the planned bar BoF if you are=20 interested in this topic.

Thank you.

Bhumip Khasnabish (vumip1@gmail.com)

Clouds bar BoF Convener

------_=_NextPart_001_01CAB3E5.E0ACFD32-- From mcr@sandelman.ca Mon Feb 22 10:05:14 2010 Return-Path: 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 5E1A428C360; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:05:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.327 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.327 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.627, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] 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 uhOnwXViCMe1; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:05:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACDD728C35C; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:05:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (unknown [132.213.238.4]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECBAA3436F; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:02:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9C0F4E788; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:07:11 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: ietf@ietf.org, clouds@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: MH-E 8.1; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 21) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:07:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:05:14 -0000 >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Romascanu writes: >> A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic: Dan> clouds@ietf.org . Dan> Do you mean a mail list? Can you provide subscribe information? The participants are aware of the work occuring in the Open Grid Forum, in the OCCI WG? -- ] He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life! | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ Kyoto Plus: watch the video then sign the petition. From brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 12:50:37 2010 Return-Path: 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 2B3393A67F0; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:50:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.685 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.685 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.086, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 gFQXz1VxX3kG; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:50:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239A828C0E1; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:50:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by pvg2 with SMTP id 2so285516pvg.31 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:52:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=F3X97HuEyAt5Rbl6CdRDLNHY4EgUSiY/6PTrSNFiOOI=; b=IQAXZaHzBQ6yhF+J2KstdvqDk1S2tv5E/2DEXFU31qnbsBby5lClmwjZHn4tTv9mVD BIx0q4j4mRZWNLnTuQhAPPKNS33FmTKbfyRUDdgkfsbsvlWWpDRnXNh3PPRvbFu1a0ey ZkpWglFfIaJiOE3mpMynsC364KSXcvv6D+8MI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=bwSYYe4/XfNJGpWEn8cvswy5mLhrbaIYwnRPoGdW2z6DVvMG7FEzu5gFX3jRnfYbWf CprMLTWhFxUGlnBsXEkYlJXChiNmvBE1G0f6aAzgTl0l7WT65Dyyg7GVLMZ5Z0rYzFjA djEQ2s5D3Y6GPbvmAt/SensHAX26zSYkt18DQ= Received: by 10.141.89.10 with SMTP id r10mr6394114rvl.69.1266871951302; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:52:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm289665pzk.3.2010.02.22.12.52.29 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:52:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:52:27 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Richardson References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> In-Reply-To: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, David Chadwick Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:50:37 -0000 On 2010-02-23 07:07, Michael Richardson wrote: >>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Romascanu writes: > >> A new alias has been created for discussion on this topic: > Dan> clouds@ietf.org . > > Dan> Do you mean a mail list? Can you provide subscribe information? > > The participants are aware of the work occuring in the Open Grid Forum, > in the OCCI WG? My thought exactly. The distinction between cloud computing and open grid computing is very small (or possibly zero) and we have a sister standards body that has been working in this area for years. David Chadwick is the IETF liaison to the OGF. I can see an argument for additional work on the *implications* of grid/cloud computing on IETF protocols. Brian From ole@cisco.com Mon Feb 22 13:15:09 2010 Return-Path: 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 3E01A28C3B2; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:15:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.555 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 r5mrIAbXlC89; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:15:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183B728C3B7; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:15:05 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAKOCgkurRN+J/2dsb2JhbACbAXOlJoE2CgGJJQmNL4JmggUEgxU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,520,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="486918896" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2010 21:17:04 +0000 Received: from pita.cisco.com (pita.cisco.com [171.71.177.199]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o1MLH3Ys001727; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:17:03 GMT Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:15:41 -0800 (PST) From: Ole Jacobsen To: dcrocker@bbiw.net In-Reply-To: <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, David Chadwick Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen List-Id: Clouds pre-BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:09 -0000 I agree with Dave and offer the following article (in two parts) for further background reading. (The second part will be available in printed form in Anaheim): http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_12-3/123_cloud1.html and http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_12-4/124_cloud2.html (Whole issues can also be downloaded in PDF format). We now return to our regular scheduled programming and discussions about how to get from various airports to Disneyland. Ole Ole J. Jacobsen Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal Cisco Systems Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628 E-mail: ole@cisco.com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Dave CROCKER wrote: > Having recently gone through the exercise of trying to understand what these > different terms actually meant, I discovered that the underlying problem is > that you are both right, as are a variety of other people who have other > views... > > As already noted, the term 'cloud' is now used in many different ways, > including as a synonym for 'network' and for 'Internet', even amongst > technical folk. (Really.) > > There are some people who have very specific and nuanced technical > definitions, including distinguishing cloud from grid. But no set of > definitions seems to have a broad base of support. > > For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was happy with > the NIST language: > > > > d/ > > -- > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net From brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 14:10:09 2010 Return-Path: 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 7C6AA3A8259; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:10:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.682 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.682 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.083, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 EV1GR9eP79Nz; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:10:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-px0-f188.google.com (mail-px0-f188.google.com [209.85.216.188]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D5B3A8314; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:10:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by pxi26 with SMTP id 26so4777932pxi.17 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=P86nQmAxzq89YpUqf6huqdcjuc/gIazvCplGJhJN5Kk=; b=tFBTlliISNabDLITDDO0n0+deg8QEmTt7tPbuI7wqVrkvHCnP76xdjx8NyIb8Muwcn +kFlsHFJgGA12eUx5ZlOdlm6hAJ4nBON08jEB2V90z9Br2rI75QD8BmApyEzYCzh1lI1 t8hchPUqvLHp9SzjvIfBwv/SiQEcxWrKIqEC4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=bfBW9iu4kjEXrIocyduQUwyoKLIGxCYtZuGjgLjzpN1Y2AbDw59WTwKRGfvBIQTPfo ZP1YP1Xh6hnyAbZD2JsW0Hq/Z2qT3qipMi8vPqRR5DvfptJtMlkn0sduamr/bh2on0kG scxPpn6U44J+ee0WQbKNiJcIAj5oBQI8KjmBM= Received: by 10.142.207.20 with SMTP id e20mr761753wfg.253.1266876716573; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm350399pzk.13.2010.02.22.14.11.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:11:53 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ole Jacobsen References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net, David Chadwick , ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:10:09 -0000 Well yes, everybody's right in this area, since the terminology is so fuzzy and so infected by marketing noise. In any case, I am not for a moment saying: don't hold a Bar BOF. It seems like an excellent idea to talk about it. What I am saying is: our sister standards body the OGF seems like the natural home for this topic, and we have to be very precise in defining scope to avoid overlap and confusion. Regards Brian On 2010-02-23 10:15, Ole Jacobsen wrote: > I agree with Dave and offer the following article (in two parts) for > further background reading. (The second part will be available in > printed form in Anaheim): > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_12-3/123_cloud1.html > > and > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_12-4/124_cloud2.html > > (Whole issues can also be downloaded in PDF format). > > We now return to our regular scheduled programming and discussions > about how to get from various airports to Disneyland. > > Ole > > Ole J. Jacobsen > Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal > Cisco Systems > Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628 > E-mail: ole@cisco.com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj > > > On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Dave CROCKER wrote: > >> Having recently gone through the exercise of trying to understand what these >> different terms actually meant, I discovered that the underlying problem is >> that you are both right, as are a variety of other people who have other >> views... >> >> As already noted, the term 'cloud' is now used in many different ways, >> including as a synonym for 'network' and for 'Internet', even amongst >> technical folk. (Really.) >> >> There are some people who have very specific and nuanced technical >> definitions, including distinguishing cloud from grid. But no set of >> definitions seems to have a broad base of support. >> >> For defining 'cloud', one group I'm participating in decided it was happy with >> the NIST language: >> >> >> >> d/ >> >> -- >> >> Dave Crocker >> Brandenburg InternetWorking >> bbiw.net > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > From fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk Mon Feb 22 15:21:49 2010 Return-Path: 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 0A76D28C457; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:21:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.384 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.384 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.215, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 mN0AMOudaoAx; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:21:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.137]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D0128C45A; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:21:46 -0800 (PST) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:39631) by ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.157]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1Njhcv-00046H-PO (Exim 4.70) (return-path ); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:23:45 +0000 Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1Njhcv-0004yq-RY (Exim 4.67) (return-path ); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:23:45 +0000 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:23:45 +0000 From: Tony Finch X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk To: dcrocker@bbiw.net In-Reply-To: <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: Tony Finch X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, David Chadwick Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:21:49 -0000 On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > As already noted, the term 'cloud' is now used in many different ways, > including as a synonym for 'network' and for 'Internet', even amongst > technical folk. (Really.) I get the impression that this was the original usage, from diagrams where the network was abstracted as a vague cloud whose details were irrelevant. Hence "cloud computing" == computing somwhere out in the network where we don't need to care about the details. > Nice. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD. From scott.brim@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 16:37:55 2010 Return-Path: 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 02BF028C4A5; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:37:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 kigXdbD++hwb; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:37:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0327328C44A; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:37:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so742356qwb.31 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:39:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VlrkpOgCRSHQCcM/VCIJStWe9dyVA8ECEkFbQDBH+9g=; b=bNsyTlc30H/fay6PSWof/iPCkeSi+DOvaMuCLg3Lg7p/ZMSnzE6DhL1WGP+N2s0AFN 8R/Wsf8U4MHd9WTy9dq51+FjJgucFdLvkZhrCHIQZZZ+2wfBTbEaQ6+EkZ8s/nKb5uGp gWifdoIUs2O0FH2RIaluBhhMxhQy4XKbx7l38= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=eBg4okiWgNt/tyWNSk3PdgX9K1lotYpeRbCyg1seUCJy3AQhtf52GIWHqUBZk8jvkd ZhjhLMPwjmU4ab/12Pfs0Zqo9r3dOeTCaaiexq8t6jQOdL4qsw96feuY6LYp3EEmDykB rgBBKAwggM1QCGs4rzLZIZ8ER+wpX1YH5GAik= Received: by 10.224.82.140 with SMTP id b12mr6471983qal.48.1266885590211; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:39:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbrim-mbp.local (198-135-0-233.cisco.com [198.135.0.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6sm11534313qwd.16.2010.02.22.16.39.47 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:39:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B8323D1.8000601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:39:45 -0500 From: Scott Brim User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian E Carpenter References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com> <4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net> <4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, Ole Jacobsen , dcrocker@bbiw.net, David Chadwick , ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:37:55 -0000 Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote on 02/22/2010 17:11 EST: > Well yes, everybody's right in this area, since the terminology > is so fuzzy and so infected by marketing noise. In any case, I am > not for a moment saying: don't hold a Bar BOF. It seems like an > excellent idea to talk about it. What I am saying is: our sister > standards body the OGF seems like the natural home for this > topic, and we have to be very precise in defining scope to avoid > overlap and confusion. > > Regards > Brian If you're proposing OGF you should look at the 6 or 7 other SDOs doing useful work on clouds, e.g. the DMTF. It's a complex situation. From jewheele@cisco.com Mon Feb 22 17:03:34 2010 Return-Path: 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 750DC28C450; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:03:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 Irt+s7R3LQgJ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:03:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D9428C473; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:03:33 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAFy4gkurR7Ht/2dsb2JhbACbAXOjSJg5hGsEgxU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,522,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="301857267" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2010 01:05:33 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o1N15XYM018204; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:05:33 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-229.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.122]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:05:33 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:05:31 -0800 Message-ID: <55C7D0A26108FD47BFEDF55BCBFAD93C09FEEA9E@xmb-sjc-229.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <517bf111002221645q1d8e84c9j2a26cd5f016a4912@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) Thread-Index: Acq0IYFy9DbSloxZQTmacIYYQ/yEmAAAodYg References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com><4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net><4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> <4B8323D1.8000601@gmail.com> <517bf111002221645q1d8e84c9j2a26cd5f016a4912@mail.gmail.com> From: "Jeff Wheeler (jewheele)" To: , "Scott Brim" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Feb 2010 01:05:33.0889 (UTC) FILETIME=[4D1A9310:01CAB424] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:40 -0800 Cc: clouds@ietf.org, "Ole Jacobsen \(ole\)" , ietf@ietf.org, David Chadwick , dcrocker@bbiw.net Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:03:34 -0000 actually in the DMTF Telco WG we're completing a 3-month study of the = metrics and data artifacts used by the various SDOs, consortia and forum = currently involved in their own formal cloud standards and the count is = 27, that without the vendors inter-cloud management interfaces. chuckle -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 4:45 PM To: Scott Brim Cc: Ole Jacobsen (ole); ietf@ietf.org; clouds@ietf.org; = dcrocker@bbiw.net; David Chadwick Subject: Re: Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, = Anaheim, CA) > If you're proposing OGF you should look at the 6 or 7 other SDOs doing = > useful work on clouds, e.g. the DMTF. =A0It's a complex situation. I would have said "ridiculous" actually. So much standards energy, so = little shipping technology. -Tim = _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf From brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 18:02:42 2010 Return-Path: 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 E250928C44A; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:02:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.666 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 5E8mwGhJNvVa; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:02:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com (mail-fx0-f213.google.com [209.85.220.213]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F17B3A829D; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:02:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by fxm5 with SMTP id 5so3426353fxm.29 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:04:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TqwheKT9xVU/61CVg6J5m359hx+hamMawLMqufWHG/Y=; b=wjVhFkikn8sHy9ySbVk+4HSH3VrnHll6iTEt8trRERBEHkRyJ3t0rpyu0KGVk2eHqf yQ+FowneNXe2+O3UJ10HUItt6+Y1zfLBjRA7jJRUEPAVBuc+7jw2xSSzWaIUDu3F5BKm iB2bQUqTsbv0V4wNc3PZyd1oFA0kZGYR+LACs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=AMZwFbs5m6/ou4sv01wJO1Ein/qNY+7LZZPjnvy4CI/EFEdfskGxhqrXGNDuXJQdLx FqyanPL5e68qOL1PaxhcKMbHLLA3jcd0AAKDJfYMnx3z5h5koaUZNRBBpAyNBDu2HvY4 Sl//17CG+OSQ7Jl80lNdY2h2M+q6BBV/QxmWU= Received: by 10.223.132.197 with SMTP id c5mr2107341fat.35.1266890678187; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:04:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p9sm6342427fkb.33.2010.02.22.18.04.33 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:04:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B8337B7.1040707@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:04:39 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeff Wheeler (jewheele)" References: <20339.1266862031@marajade.sandelman.ca> <4B82EE8B.5030001@gmail.com><4B82F256.5010807@dcrocker.net><4B830129.6000303@gmail.com> <4B8323D1.8000601@gmail.com> <517bf111002221645q1d8e84c9j2a26cd5f016a4912@mail.gmail.com> <55C7D0A26108FD47BFEDF55BCBFAD93C09FEEA9E@xmb-sjc-229.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <55C7D0A26108FD47BFEDF55BCBFAD93C09FEEA9E@xmb-sjc-229.amer.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:15:41 -0800 Cc: "Ole Jacobsen \(ole\)" , ietf@ietf.org, clouds@ietf.org, Scott Brim , dcrocker@bbiw.net, David Chadwick Subject: Re: [clouds] Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:02:43 -0000 Chuckle? Not really. This is depressing. So maybe the IETF should smile and stand back politely. Brian On 2010-02-23 14:05, Jeff Wheeler (jewheele) wrote: > actually in the DMTF Telco WG we're completing a 3-month study of the metrics and data artifacts used by the various SDOs, consortia and forum currently involved in their own formal cloud standards and the count is 27, that without the vendors inter-cloud management interfaces. > > chuckle > > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 4:45 PM > To: Scott Brim > Cc: Ole Jacobsen (ole); ietf@ietf.org; clouds@ietf.org; dcrocker@bbiw.net; David Chadwick > Subject: Re: Announcing Clouds bar BoF during IETF-77 (March, 2010, Anaheim, CA) > >> If you're proposing OGF you should look at the 6 or 7 other SDOs doing >> useful work on clouds, e.g. the DMTF. It's a complex situation. > > I would have said "ridiculous" actually. So much standards energy, so little shipping technology. -Tim _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > From moh.torabi@alcatel-lucent.com Tue Feb 23 11:35:55 2010 Return-Path: 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 B58023A79A3 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:35:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.378 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.001, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=2.219] 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 mHsHYn2BoTat for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:35:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from ihemail2.lucent.com (ihemail2.lucent.com [135.245.0.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC1128C130 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:35:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ihrh1.emsr.lucent.com (h135-1-218-53.lucent.com [135.1.218.53]) by ihemail2.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id o1NJbuUe011105 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:37:56 -0600 (CST) Received: from USNAVSXCHHUB03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsxchhub03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.112]) by ihrh1.emsr.lucent.com (8.13.8/emsr) with ESMTP id o1NJblLl029942 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:37:56 -0600 (CST) Received: from USNAVSXCHMBSA1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.119]) by USNAVSXCHHUB03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.112]) with mapi; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:37:53 -0600 From: "Torabi, Mohammad (Moh)" To: "'clouds@ietf.org'" Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:37:49 -0600 Thread-Topic: subscribe Thread-Index: Acq0v66ZU9oipTJFS3GdZTYT1h7ubA== Message-ID: <6F428EFD2B8C2F49A2FB1317291A76C113374885A0@USNAVSXCHMBSA1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6F428EFD2B8C2F49A2FB1317291A76C113374885A0USNAVSXCHMBSA_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.35 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:50:15 -0800 Subject: [clouds] subscribe X-BeenThere: clouds@ietf.org 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: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:38:35 -0000 --_000_6F428EFD2B8C2F49A2FB1317291A76C113374885A0USNAVSXCHMBSA_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable --_000_6F428EFD2B8C2F49A2FB1317291A76C113374885A0USNAVSXCHMBSA_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

--_000_6F428EFD2B8C2F49A2FB1317291A76C113374885A0USNAVSXCHMBSA_--