[occi-wg] Resource Types: Compute / Network / Storage

Simon Wardley simon.wardley at canonical.com
Sun Apr 19 14:55:04 CDT 2009


I completely agree with you - 100%.

If you could achieve this, it would be very beneficial.

On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 20:45 +0100, Alexis Richardson wrote:
> All,
> Please heed Simon's point:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Simon Wardley
> <simon.wardley at canonical.com> wrote:
> >> That mostly works for me,
> >
> > That's good, but we need to encourage everyone to stick to the same
> > terminology and not go about creating new stuff.
> In discussions with folks over the last few days, I have noticed a
> tendency to assume that OCCI is a premature exercise.  The argument
> made is that creating an open (standard) API will either stifle
> innovation or simply miss the point, because clouds and cloud APIs are
> still evolving.  A concomitant claim is that an open API will
> necessarily attempt to invent something new, or introduce complexity
> where it is unwarranted.
> To such people, I have been saying: At this stage, we are not trying
> to invent anything.  IMO: our focus is on carefully representing
> existing art, towards a progressively simpler model.  At this time,
> this means codifying commonality across *existing* cloud APIs and
> models, at the IaaS layer.  Our hope is that the result of this will
> be something very easy to implement, with only a few verbs, and a
> model that is obviously consistent with other standards.
> The exact number of 'core' verbs is TBD - we don't yet agree on this -
> but my *own* hope is that the core OCCI spec is surprisingly short in
> pagelength if nothing else.
> alexis
Simon Wardley
Software Services Manager,
Canonical Ltd.
TEL: +44 (0)207 630 2451
MOB : +44 (0)7972 911 449
TWITTER: http://www.twitter.com/swardley/

More information about the occi-wg mailing list