The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I arrived at that conclusion:
- If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
- If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
- If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
- If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
- Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web applications, management and monitoring applications, security applications, etc.)?
Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that would better serve the discussion?
I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
This is a great summary of the differences! Only think I'd add is that while one offering can qualify for all of these points, that doesn't make it better or worse: it merely means that all the definitions can play on that technology.
There are more points of separation when we start to think about jobs that are abstracted from the underlying infrastructure (e.g. Condor, AppEngine, etc.). In fact things become really confusing IMHO because app-level abstraction comes at the issue from such a different point of view.
IMHO the one really bad thing we could do is make a single map of all the definitions. There are multiple maps based on where your starting point is, with--for example--one map if you start with a hardware view of the world (below) and another map if you start with a resource scheduling point of view (Condor, etc).
[mailto:cloud-computing@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Urquhart Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 0:44 AM To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Subject: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I arrived at that conclusion:
- If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
- If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
- If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
- If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
- Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web applications, management and monitoring applications, security applications, etc.)?
Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that would better serve the discussion?
I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
Thanks for bringing this up, James. It's been on my mind as well.
It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall. I've got a talk on just this topic at the Next Generation Data Center conference in August. I've used the term "application fabric" for the resource pooling model you describe. One of the things I like about it is that it connotes the flexibility of the model relative to traditional siloed approaches.
That said,I've used other terms as well. Gartner has coined a term "grid-based application platform" that I like, but I think it speaks more to the upper end of the stack (e.g. distributed app platform/server) moreso than the entire model. I tend not to like the "utility..." terms as much, because I think they highlight a 3rd party or Internet-delivered aspect which is orthogonal to what we want to focus on here. I understand that it doesn't have to be that way--the organization providing the utility service can be within the same company--but I find that the Public Utility metaphor is too powerful to be easily overcome. Sam
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 2:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks > and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap > in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view > to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I > arrived at that conclusion:
> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. > HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an > as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over > the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution > stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is > important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" > does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run > your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where > resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, > including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web > applications, management and monitoring applications, security > applications, etc.)?
> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled > computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility > computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business > model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to > do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how > VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such > as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that > would better serve the discussion?
> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing > infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am > biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
----- Original Message ---- From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
Good question. Since Amazon EC2 appeared a lot of customers that we talk to (including many banks) have stopped using utility altogether. Instead they have started saying "we want one of those - we want our own cloud".
By this they typically mean:
* a billable shared resource * unbounded: you can add or remove costs at will * accessible from anywhere in their org (and partners) * with a uniform delivery and management
So that:
* LOBs can move to an opex model for their infrastructure costs, * and IT can use virtualization to control application delivery.
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 8:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view > to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I arrived at that conclusion:
> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where > resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, > including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web > applications, management and monitoring applications, security > applications, etc.)?
> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled > computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility > computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business > model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to > do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that > would better serve the discussion?
> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing > infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
> Good question. Since Amazon EC2 appeared a lot of customers that we > talk to (including many banks) have stopped using utility altogether. > Instead they have started saying "we want one of those - we want our > own cloud".
> By this they typically mean:
> * a billable shared resource > * unbounded: you can add or remove costs at will > * accessible from anywhere in their org (and partners) > * with a uniform delivery and management
> So that:
> * LOBs can move to an opex model for their infrastructure costs, > * and IT can use virtualization to control application delivery.
> What should we call this?
> alexis
> CohesiveFT > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 8:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> > The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) > Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe > is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view > > to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I > arrived at that conclusion:
> > - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model > (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
> > - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on > an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
> > - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided > over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
> > - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the > execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on > (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that > "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite > possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at > Cassatt)
> > - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where > > resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, > > including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web > > applications, management and monitoring applications, security > > applications, etc.)?
> > Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled > > computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility > > computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business > > model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to > > do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how > VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such > as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that > > would better serve the discussion?
> > I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing > > infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am > biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
Personally see I cloud computing as the ability to tap into "external resources" beyond the confines of your IT department and or data centre. So in a sense creating a local cloud defeats the benefits of an external compute resource. On the other hand I also so see the need to better tap into the existing computing capacity you already have. This elastic approach enables an adaptive infrastructure with sources of secure additional capacity if and when it is needed. I refer to this as "elastic computing". For us, this opportunity is driving the major of our business currently.
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 3:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view > to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I arrived at that conclusion:
> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where > resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, > including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web > applications, management and monitoring applications, security > applications, etc.)?
> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled > computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility > computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business > model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to > do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that > would better serve the discussion?
> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing > infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
> James
-- --
Reuven Cohen Founder & Chief Technologist, Enomaly Inc. www.enomaly.com :: 416 848 6036 x 1 skype: ruv.net // aol: ruv6
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:11:08 -0500From: s...@charrington.comTo: cloud-comput...@googlegroups.comSubject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")? Anyone for "Intra-Cloud"?
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Alexis Richardson <alexis.richard...@gmail.com> wrote:
JamesGood question. Since Amazon EC2 appeared a lot of customers that wetalk to (including many banks) have stopped using utility altogether.Instead they have started saying "we want one of those - we want ourown cloud".By this they typically mean:* a billable shared resource* unbounded: you can add or remove costs at will* accessible from anywhere in their org (and partners)* with a uniform delivery and managementSo that:* LOBs can move to an opex model for their infrastructure costs,* and IT can use virtualization to control application delivery.What should we call this?alexisCohesiveFT
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 8:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:> > The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view> to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I arrived at that conclusion:>> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and>> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and>> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and>> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)>> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where> resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads,> including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web> applications, management and monitoring applications, security> applications, etc.)?>> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled> computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility> computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business> model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to> do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that> would better serve the discussion?>> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing> infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?>> James>>>>> >>--Alexis Richardson+44 20 7617 7339 (UK)+44 77 9865 2911 (cell)+1 650 206 2517 (US)
> ________________________________ > Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:11:08 -0500 > From: s...@charrington.com > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Alexis Richardson > <alexis.richard...@gmail.com> wrote:
> James
> Good question. Since Amazon EC2 appeared a lot of customers that we > talk to (including many banks) have stopped using utility altogether. > Instead they have started saying "we want one of those - we want our > own cloud".
> By this they typically mean:
> * a billable shared resource > * unbounded: you can add or remove costs at will > * accessible from anywhere in their org (and partners) > * with a uniform delivery and management
> So that:
> * LOBs can move to an opex model for their infrastructure costs, > * and IT can use virtualization to control application delivery.
> What should we call this?
> alexis
> CohesiveFT > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 8:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) Networks >> and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a gap >> in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view >> to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I >> arrived at that conclusion:
>> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model >> (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
>> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on an >> as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
>> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided over >> the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
>> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the execution >> stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it is >> important to note for the purposes of this argument that "resource-pooled" >> does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to run >> your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
>> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where >> resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, >> including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web >> applications, management and monitoring applications, security >> applications, etc.)?
>> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled >> computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility >> computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business >> model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to >> do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how >> VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term (such >> as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that >> would better serve the discussion?
>> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing >> infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I am >> biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
> > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Alexis Richardson > > <alexis.richard...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > James
> > Good question. Since Amazon EC2 appeared a lot of customers that we > > talk to (including many banks) have stopped using utility altogether. > > Instead they have started saying "we want one of those - we want our > > own cloud".
> > By this they typically mean:
> > * a billable shared resource > > * unbounded: you can add or remove costs at will > > * accessible from anywhere in their org (and partners) > > * with a uniform delivery and management
> > So that:
> > * LOBs can move to an opex model for their infrastructure costs, > > * and IT can use virtualization to control application delivery.
> > What should we call this?
> > alexis
> > CohesiveFT > > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 8:44 AM, James Urquhart <jurquh...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> >> The discussion about the term "cloud computing" in the "Smart(er) > Networks > >> and Cloud Computing" thread highlights what I am coming to believe is a > gap > >> in the IT taxonomy. It is a biased, self-serving view > >> to be sure :-) (I should note I am a Cassatt alumni), but here it how I > >> arrived at that conclusion:
> >> - If "grid computing" is about running job-based tasks in a MPP model > >> (e.g. HPC) (as it seems to be defined for many), and
> >> - If "utility computing" is a business model for providing computing on > an > >> as-needed, bill-for-what-you-use basis, and
> >> - If "cloud computing" is a market model describing services provided > over > >> the Internet (which it is for most of the Web 2.0 world), and
> >> - If "virtualization" describes providing software layers in the > execution > >> stack to decouple software from the hard resources it depends on (and it > is > >> important to note for the purposes of this argument that > "resource-pooled" > >> does NOT require virtualization in this sense; it is quite possible to > run > >> your software on bare metal server pools, as we did at Cassatt)
> >> - Then, what do we call the systems/infrastructure model where > >> resources are pooled together, and used for a variety of workloads, > >> including both job-based and "always running" tasks (such as web > >> applications, management and monitoring applications, security > >> applications, etc.)?
> >> Do we redefine "grid" to cover the expanded role of resource-pooled > >> computing (as 3TERA seems wont to do)? Do we leverage "utility > >> computing" as an adjective for platforms that can deliver that business > >> model for those that own infrastructure (as Cassatt and IBM tend to > >> do)? Does the term "virtualization" represent a broader view than how > >> VMWare, Microsoft and Citrix are defining it? Is there another term > (such > >> as "resource-pooled computing"--ugh) that > >> would better serve the discussion?
> >> I tend to like "utility computing platform", "utility computing > >> infrastructure" and "using a utility computing model" best, but then I > am > >> biased by my experience at Cassatt. What does this community think?
Ray, Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving closer opens more dimensions. Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is your own private computing fog :)
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that Fog? > :-)
> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and > services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe > and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted via an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the Internet or a VPN. This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with cloud computing.
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ray, > Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). > It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the > rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving > closer opens more dimensions. > Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is > your own private computing fog :)
> KS
> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >> Fog? :-)
>> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >> "on-premises cloud")?
>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe >> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> wrote: > To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted via > an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the > Internet or a VPN. > This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise > firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with > cloud computing.
> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> Sam > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ray, >> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >> closer opens more dimensions. >> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >> your own private computing fog :)
>> KS
>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that Fog? >>> :-)
>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe >>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
-- --
Reuven Cohen Founder & Chief Technologist, Enomaly Inc. www.enomaly.com :: 416 848 6036 x 1 skype: ruv.net // aol: ruv6
The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable to the user. Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective than IT shops.
You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a traditional corporate IT shop.
I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
----- Original Message ---- From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
Reuven
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> wrote: > To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted via > an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the > Internet or a VPN. > This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise > firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with > cloud computing.
> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> Sam > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ray, >> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >> closer opens more dimensions. >> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >> your own private computing fog :)
>> KS
>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that Fog? >>> :-)
>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you describe >>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
-- --
Reuven Cohen Founder & Chief Technologist, Enomaly Inc. www.enomaly.com :: 416 848 6036 x 1 skype: ruv.net // aol: ruv6
As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable > to the user. > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective > than IT shops.
> You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > traditional corporate IT shop.
> I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> Ray
> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> Reuven
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > wrote: >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> via >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the >> Internet or a VPN. >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with >> cloud computing.
>> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> Sam >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Ray, >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >>> closer opens more dimensions. >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >>> your own private computing fog :)
>>> KS
>>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >>>> Fog? >>>> :-)
>>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >>>> describe >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
I agree, fog definition is rather misleading and doesn't convey essence of the matter. I would rather compare local resource pool to literally swimming pool in your backyard and public swimming pool that has more features like wave generator and diving platforms, served by technicians and inspected by regulatory organizations. Or personal garage vs public transit. I hope this helps.
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> wrote:
> As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not > have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well > as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the > last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
> reuven
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient > and > > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely > expandable > > to the user. > > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The > > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the > first > > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost > effective > > than IT shops.
> > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but > you > > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > > traditional corporate IT shop.
> > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I > think > > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> > Ray
> > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the > "on-premises > > cloud")?
> > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> > Reuven
> > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > > wrote: > >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted > >> via > >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via > the > >> Internet or a VPN. > >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise > >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common > with > >> cloud computing.
> >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> >> Sam > >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> > >> wrote:
> >>> Ray, > >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). > >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at > the > >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving > >>> closer opens more dimensions. > >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is > >>> your own private computing fog :)
> >>> KS
> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that > >>>> Fog? > >>>> :-)
> >>>> ----- Original Message ---- > >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM > >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the > >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
> >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure > and > >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you > >>>> describe > >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the > firewall.
> I agree, fog definition is rather misleading and doesn't convey essence of > the matter. > I would rather compare local resource pool to literally swimming pool in > your backyard and public swimming pool that has more features like wave > generator and diving platforms, served by technicians and inspected by > regulatory organizations. Or personal garage vs public transit. I hope this > helps.
> KS
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> wrote:
>> As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not >> have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well >> as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the >> last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
>> reuven
>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the >> > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient >> > and >> > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely >> > expandable >> > to the user. >> > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by >> > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) >> > The >> > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the >> > first >> > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost >> > effective >> > than IT shops.
>> > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but >> > you >> > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a >> > traditional corporate IT shop.
>> > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I >> > think >> > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT >> > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
>> > Ray
>> > ----- Original Message ---- >> > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> >> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM >> > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >> > "on-premises >> > cloud")?
>> > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing >> > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional >> > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
>> > Reuven
>> > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >> > wrote: >> >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> >> via >> >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via >> >> the >> >> Internet or a VPN. >> >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common >> >> with >> >> cloud computing.
>> >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> >> Sam >> >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:
>> >>> Ray, >> >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >> >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at >> >>> the >> >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while >> >>> moving >> >>> closer opens more dimensions. >> >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it >> >>> is >> >>> your own private computing fog :)
>> >>> KS
>> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> >> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >> >>>> Fog? >> >>>> :-)
>> >>>> ----- Original Message ---- >> >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >> >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >> >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>> >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure >> >>>> and >> >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >> >>>> describe >> >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the >> >>>> firewall.
> I agree, fog definition is rather misleading and doesn't convey essence of
> the matter.
> I would rather compare local resource pool to literally swimming pool in
> your backyard and public swimming pool that has more features like wave
> generator and diving platforms, served by technicians and inspected by
> regulatory organizations. Or personal garage vs public transit. I hope this
> helps.
> KS
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> wrote:
> > As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not
> > have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well
> > as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the
> > last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
> > reuven
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the
> > > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient
> > and
> > > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely
> > expandable
> > > to the user.
> > > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by
> > > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The
> > > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the
> > first
> > > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost
> > effective
> > > than IT shops.
> > > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but
> > you
> > > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a
> > > traditional corporate IT shop.
> > > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I
> > think
> > > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT
> > > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> > > Ray
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com>
> > > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM
> > > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the
> > "on-premises
> > > cloud")?
> > > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing
> > > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional
> > > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> > > Reuven
> > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted
> > >> via
> > >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via
> > the
> > >> Internet or a VPN.
> > >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise
> > >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common
> > with
> > >> cloud computing.
> > >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> > >> Sam
> > >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> Ray,
> > >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic).
> > >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at
> > the
> > >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving
> > >>> closer opens more dimensions.
> > >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is
> > >>> your own private computing fog :)
> > >>> KS
> > >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that
> > >>>> Fog?
> > >>>> :-)
> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----
> > >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> > >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM
> > >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the
> > >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
> > >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure
> > and
> > >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you
> > >>>> describe
> > >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the
> > firewall.
----- Original Message ---- From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 7:08:47 AM Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
reuven
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable > to the user. > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective > than IT shops.
> You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > traditional corporate IT shop.
> I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> Ray
> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> Reuven
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > wrote: >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> via >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the >> Internet or a VPN. >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with >> cloud computing.
>> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> Sam >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Ray, >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >>> closer opens more dimensions. >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >>> your own private computing fog :)
>>> KS
>>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >>>> Fog? >>>> :-)
>>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >>>> describe >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
Clouds inside a firewall may be conceptually anathema to some, there is data that corporations will never allow to reside outside their own firewall. This is not a new observation; it occurred early in this mailing list, and is now being embellished in a new, active thread on security.
And clouds within the firewall are there now, anyway. Many large company's email systems are effectively application-specific clouds that all in the company just use, designed to expand as needed.
Rather than a negative, I think this notion can be taken as an opportunity to provide cloud infrastructure, and probably services, within the bounds of the IT shop itself -- infrastructure that allows IT to continue to implement the constraints and controls they need (or think they do), but do so in a more cost effective, efficient, and more generic manner.
How far *down* can this technology scale, anyway? Is it only efficiency in very large scale? IT shop clouds certainly are feasible. Department clouds, totally owned by the department? Are the tools mature enough for that?
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable > to the user. > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective > than IT shops.
> You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > traditional corporate IT shop.
> I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> Ray
> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> Reuven
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > wrote: >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> via >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the >> Internet or a VPN. >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with >> cloud computing.
>> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> Sam >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Ray, >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >>> closer opens more dimensions. >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >>> your own private computing fog :)
>>> KS
>>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >>>> Fog? >>>> :-)
>>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >>>> describe >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
Greg, I agree and I'm certain there is a budding market for enterprise clouds on the horizon. However, I think this will accelerate competition between Corp IT and public clouds and that Corp IT shops will not win the battle. I believe public clouds will prove much less expensive to operate and have security that is comparable - and in some cases - superior to Corp IT.
----- Original Message ---- From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:54:36 PM Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
Clouds inside a firewall may be conceptually anathema to some, there is data that corporations will never allow to reside outside their own firewall. This is not a new observation; it occurred early in this mailing list, and is now being embellished in a new, active thread on security.
And clouds within the firewall are there now, anyway. Many large company's email systems are effectively application-specific clouds that all in the company just use, designed to expand as needed.
Rather than a negative, I think this notion can be taken as an opportunity to provide cloud infrastructure, and probably services, within the bounds of the IT shop itself -- infrastructure that allows IT to continue to implement the constraints and controls they need (or think they do), but do so in a more cost effective, efficient, and more generic manner.
How far *down* can this technology scale, anyway? Is it only efficiency in very large scale? IT shop clouds certainly are feasible. Department clouds, totally owned by the department? Are the tools mature enough for that?
Greg Pfister
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable > to the user. > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective > than IT shops.
> You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > traditional corporate IT shop.
> I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> Ray
> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises > cloud")?
> Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> Reuven
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > wrote: >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> via >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the >> Internet or a VPN. >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with >> cloud computing.
>> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> Sam >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Ray, >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >>> closer opens more dimensions. >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >>> your own private computing fog :)
>>> KS
>>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >>>> Fog? >>>> :-)
>>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >>>> describe >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
> Eskimos have 20 words for snow and IT people have 20 words for cloud.
> On May 28, 9:25 am, "Khazret Sapenov" <sape...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I agree, fog definition is rather misleading and doesn't convey essence of >> the matter. >> I would rather compare local resource pool to literally swimming pool in >> your backyard and public swimming pool that has more features like wave >> generator and diving platforms, served by technicians and inspected by >> regulatory organizations. Or personal garage vs public transit. I hope this >> helps.
>> KS
>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> wrote:
>> > As someone who grew up on the east coast of Canada I certainly do not >> > have fond memories of fog. For me, fog represents a hindrance as well >> > as a hazard. Fog limits my ability to see whats coming and that's the >> > last thing I want when managing my infrastructure.
>> > reuven
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the >> > > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient >> > and >> > > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely >> > expandable >> > > to the user. >> > > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by >> > > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The >> > > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the >> > first >> > > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost >> > effective >> > > than IT shops.
>> > > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but >> > you >> > > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a >> > > traditional corporate IT shop.
>> > > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I >> > think >> > > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT >> > > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
>> > > Ray
>> > > ----- Original Message ---- >> > > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> >> > > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM >> > > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >> > "on-premises >> > > cloud")?
>> > > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing >> > > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional >> > > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
>> > > Reuven
>> > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >> > > wrote: >> > >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted >> > >> via >> > >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via >> > the >> > >> Internet or a VPN. >> > >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise >> > >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common >> > with >> > >> cloud computing.
>> > >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
>> > >> Sam >> > >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote:
>> > >>> Ray, >> > >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic). >> > >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at >> > the >> > >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving >> > >>> closer opens more dimensions. >> > >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is >> > >>> your own private computing fog :)
>> > >>> KS
>> > >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> >> > wrote:
>> > >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that >> > >>>> Fog? >> > >>>> :-)
>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ---- >> > >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> >> > >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com >> > >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM >> > >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the >> > >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
>> > >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure >> > and >> > >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you >> > >>>> describe >> > >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the >> > firewall.
Greg is right on the money here. Some time I am going to have to
start the thread on the cultural shift required of companies that want
to build an internal cloud/fog/bike shop/whatever.
James
On May 28, 12:54 pm, "Greg Pfister" <greg.pfis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Clouds inside a firewall may be conceptually anathema to some, there
> is data that corporations will never allow to reside outside their own
> firewall. This is not a new observation; it occurred early in this
> mailing list, and is now being embellished in a new, active thread on
> security.
> And clouds within the firewall are there now, anyway. Many large
> company's email systems are effectively application-specific clouds
> that all in the company just use, designed to expand as needed.
> Rather than a negative, I think this notion can be taken as an
> opportunity to provide cloud infrastructure, and probably services,
> within the bounds of the IT shop itself -- infrastructure that allows
> IT to continue to implement the constraints and controls they need (or
> think they do), but do so in a more cost effective, efficient, and
> more generic manner.
> How far *down* can this technology scale, anyway? Is it only
> efficiency in very large scale? IT shop clouds certainly are feasible.
> Department clouds, totally owned by the department? Are the tools
> mature enough for that?
> Greg Pfister
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the
> > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and
> > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable
> > to the user.
> > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by
> > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The
> > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first
> > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective
> > than IT shops.
> > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you
> > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a
> > traditional corporate IT shop.
> > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think
> > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT
> > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> > Ray
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com>
> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises
> > cloud")?
> > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing
> > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional
> > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> > Reuven
> > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> > wrote:
> >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted
> >> via
> >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the
> >> Internet or a VPN.
> >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise
> >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with
> >> cloud computing.
> >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> >> Sam
> >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Ray,
> >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic).
> >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the
> >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving
> >>> closer opens more dimensions.
> >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is
> >>> your own private computing fog :)
> >>> KS
> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that
> >>>> Fog?
> >>>> :-)
> >>>> ----- Original Message ----
> >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM
> >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the
> >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
> >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and
> >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you
> >>>> describe
> >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
With banks--perhaps the most security paranoid organizations outside
of the federal government--losing tapes with tens of millions of
personal accounts (unencrypted, no less), I have a very strong "I'll
believe it when I see it" about that one.
James
On May 28, 1:07 pm, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Greg, I agree and I'm certain there is a budding market for enterprise clouds on the horizon. However, I think this will accelerate competition between Corp IT and public clouds and that Corp IT shops will not win the battle. I believe public clouds will prove much less expensive to operate and have security that is comparable - and in some cases - superior to Corp IT.
> Just my 2 cents...
> Ray
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:54:36 PM
> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises cloud")?
> Clouds inside a firewall may be conceptually anathema to some, there
> is data that corporations will never allow to reside outside their own
> firewall. This is not a new observation; it occurred early in this
> mailing list, and is now being embellished in a new, active thread on
> security.
> And clouds within the firewall are there now, anyway. Many large
> company's email systems are effectively application-specific clouds
> that all in the company just use, designed to expand as needed.
> Rather than a negative, I think this notion can be taken as an
> opportunity to provide cloud infrastructure, and probably services,
> within the bounds of the IT shop itself -- infrastructure that allows
> IT to continue to implement the constraints and controls they need (or
> think they do), but do so in a more cost effective, efficient, and
> more generic manner.
> How far *down* can this technology scale, anyway? Is it only
> efficiency in very large scale? IT shop clouds certainly are feasible.
> Department clouds, totally owned by the department? Are the tools
> mature enough for that?
> Greg Pfister
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the
> > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient and
> > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely expandable
> > to the user.
> > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by
> > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) The
> > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the first
> > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost effective
> > than IT shops.
> > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall but you
> > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a
> > traditional corporate IT shop.
> > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I think
> > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT
> > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> > Ray
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com>
> > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the "on-premises
> > cloud")?
> > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing
> > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional
> > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> > Reuven
> > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> > wrote:
> >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud hosted
> >> via
> >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via the
> >> Internet or a VPN.
> >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise
> >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common with
> >> cloud computing.
> >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> >> Sam
> >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Ray,
> >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this topic).
> >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at the
> >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while moving
> >>> closer opens more dimensions.
> >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it is
> >>> your own private computing fog :)
> >>> KS
> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that
> >>>> Fog?
> >>>> :-)
> >>>> ----- Original Message ----
> >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com>
> >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM
> >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the
> >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
> >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure and
> >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you
> >>>> describe
> >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the firewall.
I believe clouds within a company are more prevalent than we realize. It is fairly common now for big companies (Oracle comes to mind) to set up remote data centers for employee systems. When I worked at Oracle I never really saw my primary Linux machine. I believe these machines were not virtual machines, but real ones. So the move to virtualization should make this a true cloud computing solution. Likewise Citrix, my current employer, hosts all applications that employees use "out there". Of course, that's what Citrix does well. HR applications, IT resources etc. are but internal websites that employees have gone to for years now. Lastly storage has lived on the SAN for some time now. Vijay
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:15 PM, <jurquh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Greg is right on the money here. Some time I am going to have to > start the thread on the cultural shift required of companies that want > to build an internal cloud/fog/bike shop/whatever.
> James
> On May 28, 12:54 pm, "Greg Pfister" <greg.pfis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Clouds inside a firewall may be conceptually anathema to some, there > > is data that corporations will never allow to reside outside their own > > firewall. This is not a new observation; it occurred early in this > > mailing list, and is now being embellished in a new, active thread on > > security.
> > And clouds within the firewall are there now, anyway. Many large > > company's email systems are effectively application-specific clouds > > that all in the company just use, designed to expand as needed.
> > Rather than a negative, I think this notion can be taken as an > > opportunity to provide cloud infrastructure, and probably services, > > within the bounds of the IT shop itself -- infrastructure that allows > > IT to continue to implement the constraints and controls they need (or > > think they do), but do so in a more cost effective, efficient, and > > more generic manner.
> > How far *down* can this technology scale, anyway? Is it only > > efficiency in very large scale? IT shop clouds certainly are feasible. > > Department clouds, totally owned by the department? Are the tools > > mature enough for that?
> > Greg Pfister
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > The problem with any "cloud" behind a corporate firewall is that the > > > motivations are different. Clouds exist to be cost effective, efficient > and > > > somewhat generic computing resources that appear to be infinitely > expandable > > > to the user. > > > Corporate IT shops exist to serve a specialized constituency (often by > > > controlling it and restricting access to a certain set of resources.) > The > > > reason clouds are replacing traditional walled garden IT shops in the > first > > > place is because the clouds are more efficient and thus more cost > effective > > > than IT shops.
> > > You can move the cloud physical paradigm behind a corporate firewall > but you > > > can't move the motivations and thus a VPC will quickly resemble a > > > traditional corporate IT shop.
> > > I don't disagree that there will be enterprises that want VPCs but I > think > > > they will find that what they really want is a better, more flexible IT > > > shop. (a liffting of the fog...)
> > > Ray
> > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Reuven Cohen <r...@enomaly.com> > > > To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:13:57 PM > > > Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the > "on-premises > > > cloud")?
> > > Virtual Private Cloud encapsulates both local and remote computing > > > resources. The idea is to easily and securely tie into additional > > > computing resources wherever and whenever they are needed.
> > > Reuven
> > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sam Charrington < > s...@charrington.com> > > > wrote: > > >> To address "Virtual Private Cloud," this still refers to a cloud > hosted > > >> via > > >> an external provider (e.g. a "public computing utility"), accessed via > the > > >> Internet or a VPN. > > >> This is not a true Fog!!! A true Fog is hosted behind the enterprise > > >> firewall, but has deployment and operating characteristics in common > with > > >> cloud computing.
> > >> Maybe Fog = Fabric or Grid ;-)
> > >> Sam > > >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Khazret Sapenov <sape...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote:
> > >>> Ray, > > >>> Perhaps it depends on viewpoint (as Mike already noted in this > topic). > > >>> It reminds me a popular example from string theory, when you look at > the > > >>> rope from 100 feet distance seeing a line (one dimension), while > moving > > >>> closer opens more dimensions. > > >>> Same applies to cloud computing, if you are inside private cloud, it > is > > >>> your own private computing fog :)
> > >>> KS
> > >>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Ray Nugent <rnug...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> > >>>> So it's a cloud, but instead of being far away it's near? Isn't that > > >>>> Fog? > > >>>> :-)
> > >>>> ----- Original Message ---- > > >>>> From: Sam Charrington <s...@charrington.com> > > >>>> To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com > > >>>> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:31:51 AM > > >>>> Subject: Re: What term for resource-pooled computing (e.g. the > > >>>> "on-premises cloud")?
> > >>>> It's my belief that the future model for providing IT infrastructure > and > > >>>> services in large organizations will very much resemble what you > > >>>> describe > > >>>> and what many call cloud computing, but will occur behind the > firewall.
|
