IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
A Clouds bar BoF was held during the IETF-78 on Wednesday (11:30 AM, 28-July-2010) with continuation
on Thursday (11:30 AM, 29-July-2010) during IETF-78 in Maastricht, Netherlands. The meetings were
held in Paris and London rooms of MECC.
The bar BoF convener was Bhumip Khasnabish (vumip1@gmail.com).
The first meeting (held on Wed., 28-July-2010) was attended by more than 100 people. The second
meeting (held on Thursday, 29-July-2010) had more than 50 participants.
The participants represented a very good cross-section of the Industry, with presentations from Google,
Cisco, VerizonBusiness, ZTE, ALU, AlertLogic, ForceTech, and Huawei.
All of the slides are currently available at the following Website:
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/Clouds . Detailed notes from each day’s session can be
found in the second and third sections of this report.
It was agreed that we will complete the Internet Drafts from the presentation during IETF-78 Clouds bar
BoFs for distribution for comments to clouds@ietf.org by mid-Oct.2010. And then, we will revise and
publish these Drafts by Monday, 01-November-2010. Clouds discussion archive continues to be hosted
at the following Website: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/clouds/current/maillist.html.
We plan to start biweekly Conf calls staring from Sept., 2010, with a possible follow up Workshop in the
US in early October 2010. We will report back during the IETF-79.
We plan to propose a full BoF during IETF-79.
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 1 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Clouds Bar BoF – 11:40 AM to 1PM – Wednesday 28 July 2010 (Rm.:0.5 Paris)

Full Room – lots of interest – one count indicated that there were more than one hundred
people in the room (standing room only)

Bhumip (Clouds bar BoF Convener)

o
This is the second Cloud Bar BoF – the first one was at IETF 77.
o
Send subscribe message to clouds@ietf.org
o
Summary of actions and follow up from IETF-77 Clouds bar BoF was presented.
Introduction of presenters and their interest in the cloud
Sam Johnston, Google – Cloud Standards

Disclaimer – personal opinion – not the official Google opinion. Works on cloud as a 20%
project.

Comment about Wikipedia definition of cloud – should be like “washing your hands in a public
water facility”

Don’t believe you can deliver the cloud internally (“private cloud doesn’t work”).
o
Mainframe to Client Server to Cloud
o
Shift form IT as a product to IT as a service
o
Similar to the introduction of power grids (no one generates power except Eastman
Kodak which still has its own power plants)
o
Disruptive innovation

Cloud Stack – IaaS, PaaS, SaaS with examples

Small workload rather than a large workload like VM is a better idea.

Operating Env for Amazon – Unix philosophy – do one thing well.

Design Philosophy – design for failure – legacy is unreliable sw on reliable h/w while cloud is
reliable sw on unreliable h/w.
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 2 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)

Cloud Standards
o

There are no standards in the cloud but lots of specifications.
Alternatives
o
Adapters (jclouds, deltacloud, etc.) – impedance mismatch, performance problems..

Open Standards – copyrights, patents, trademarks, multiple interoperable implementations,
process is difficult to test (e.g DMTF is not really open – need $12K to join), many/most are
“non-proprietary”

Open Cloud Initiative
o
Modeled after Open Src Initiative (OSI)
o
Balance between open and closed
o
Open Protocols + Open Interfaces required

Google Document List API example

OVF – XML based format – is very complicated! Disk format is out of scope of the OVF which is a
problem.)

API Opportunity for IETF
o
IETF Infrastructure API?

o
Document de facto standard? Avoids vendor capture and requires implementor
commitments
Define “blue sky”protocol

Use OCCI as a starting point?

OG?

Amazon S3 discussion – HTTP based API for file management. Google Storage (beta) implements
this API but is not interoperable due to a different authentication scheme.

SNIA CDMI – CRUD for “data elements” good for enterprise storage but not so much for
simplicity, multiple implementers (in theory).

IETF Storage API?
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 3 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
o
HTTP? WebDAV? Something in between?

No XML please!

Collections (buckets) are a challenge.

Comment from Igor Feinberg of Alcatel Lucent – why did you say “No XML”? Answer: Due to
complexity and interop issues.

Other APIs
o
Need platform API – more complex than infrastructure (AppEngine, Azure, Fore.com)
o
Application APIs are application specific.

Easier to start with Infrastructure and then work on the Platform API (and Application APIs after
that?)

Existing Standards
o
Internet has TCP/IP, Web has HTTP/HTML – if you don’t do this, you will get multiple
formats including XML vs JSON
o
Use HTTP!

User HTTP as intended – Web/Resource Oriented Architecture

Metadata in headers (no envelopes) – no SOAP, Atom, etc.

Draft-johnston and draft-nottingham-http-link-header…

CloudAudit – working on this with Chris Hoff from Cisco

CloudLog – defines structure for syslog entries

Subject the above 2 to IETF standards process?

Igor – ALU - Would you include Safe Harbor under Compliance? Sam – haven’t tackled this yet.

Yuri (UVA.nl) – University of Amsterdam – how much of cloud is technology and how much is
business? Sam – cloud is a business driver – used to reduce cost (reduces capex and possibly
opex in the future). Yuri – are we oversimplifying the issue by reducing the cloud to a HTTP
header discussion? Shouldn’t we look at larger issues like storage, computing, visualization
which are things that service providers are looking at? Sam: S3 is an example of making things
simple in the cloud – alternatively if we were using things like SOAP, adoption would be slower..
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 4 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
Gene Golovinsky – AlertLogic – CloudLog
o
Traditional logging – Syslog, Windows event facility, applications log into proprietary files.
o
Info about actual entity, type of activities, time of occurrence.
o
Applications of traditional logging – system management, network management, etc.
o
Processing & understanding logs in their native format is very difficult – custom scripts/tools are
used for this.
o
Cloud – traditional logging doesn’t work – but system management, etc. are still needed.
o
So, for the cloud:
o
Track complete user interactions with cloud components – all activities should have
complete audit trail from the initial request to the component from authentication, i
o
Two more points from slides!!
o
Use Syslog format
o
Proposed Next Steps
o
Logging & auditability of the cloud and in the cloud is crucial for cloud adoption, so

o
Create a new WG or use already existing relevant one to focus specifically on
the cloud
Igor Feinberg, Alcatel-Lucent – Issues related to privacy eg. HIPAA – traceable identity – what do
you think? Sam J – ability to filter out identities – implementation specific detail.
Q: Excellent in many ways. You mentioned specifically privacy. Ability to erase tracable identity
information from all logs may be required. Have you considered that?
A1: Not considered, but is part of overall security considerations.
A2: One thing discussed was ability to filter records. Want to check if someone has been
impersonating you. This is an app consideration.
Monique Morrow – Protocol Considerations for Resource Mobility in Clouds
o
Problem Statement
o
Intra-inter domains with multiple DCs
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 5 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
o
o
Need to signal [on demand] resources in the form of VMs that could move across DCs
intra-inter domains.
o
Assumption of existence of trust boundaries.
“Uber” Considerations
o
End pt addressability and state?
o
Data exchange and formats between domains
o
MTU and so called “trombone effect” – encapsulation, etc.
o
Geographical proximity
o
Protocols e.g. TCP
o
Signaling for resource availability
o
Security considerations, e.g. protection Trojan Horse, worms, etc.
o
Management e.g. notion of autonomic, resource discovery

VM CoS?
o
Network is table stakes e.g. VLAN, VPN in context of “network virtualization” what should
the calling properties be?
o
ID, deliverables, etc. – By IETF-79 meeting prepare “draft morrow clouds resource mobility
protocol-source” or requirements draft.
o
Igor – what is the trombone effect? Answer: It is related to latency.
o
Need to look at how this work fits in with the IRTF on virtual networking research group
VPN Extension to Private Clouds (VEPC) – Paul Unbehagen (jointly with Ning, Bhumip,
and Jin)
o
IEEE list of specs – SPB, ETS, PFC, EVB, Bridge Port Extension (bh) are standards addressing DC –
but these address issues similar to what is being seen in other parts of the network – e.g. service
provider. For example, EVB enable autonomic VMs but how does this play out in the SP
network?
o
Considerations
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 6 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
o
How to use new access technologies
o
Q. from Yuri (Uva.nl): deployment of VPNs – is this a limitation of the private cloud? is this
limited to private clouds.
Answer: No.
o Q. from Yuri : which limitation do you see, what about key distribution?
Answer: Are you assuming IPSEC or some other form of encryption. Yes it is very dynamic, this is not
only a security issue, but will affect route tables. Security is a issue, balancing is an issue, reach
ability is an issue.
Virtual Host Identify and Address Resolution for Cloud Computing Service – Problem
Statement – Linda Dunbar
o
Introduction of the problem
o
Linda indicated that there is a Bar BoF at Noon tomorrow (Thursday 29July10).
Cloud SDO Survey Results Overview – Chu and Bhumip, ZTE
o
Went through the survey template used. Please provide info about new standards organization
in this template.
o
Summary and analysis slide walk through
o
Conclusion – survey reveals that different SDOs and WGs use or expect to use a set of common
IETF protocols for cloud services – will cause interop problems and impact future development
of protocols.
o
Q&A
Q1. Igor Feinberg – to Linda:
Q2. Yizhou LI ( ): Cloud is wide in scope – work on the cloud should be in the IETF but probably not in a
single WG. Expertise varies.. should we introduce the problems to the existing WGs so that they can
make extensions to their WGs for cloud. Bhumip – we have to start somewhere – look at Next Steps
slide, continue to work with the IETF/IRTF groups and define scope/charter, etc.
Bhumip announced that the Clouds bar BoF session will continue tomorrow (Thursday, 29-July-2010)
at 11:30 AM in a Room TBC (look at the IETF bar BoF Website for announcement).
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 7 of 8
IETF-78 Clouds bar BoFs Mtg. Minutes (draft ver. 00)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Clouds Bar BoF – 11:40 AM to 1PM – Thursday 29 July 2010 (Rm.: 0.1 London)
This meeting was a continuation of the bar BoF that was held on Wednesday (28-July-2010). We had one
presentation on cloud-based video streaming service b y Lisa D. of ForceTech.
The attendees agreed that the presenters should work on preparing Internet drafts on the topics on
which they presented the material on Clouds. The following is a list of the proposed Clouds Internet
drafts.








CloudAudit
CloudLog
Cloud Resource Mobility
HTTP enhancements
ARP222
VPN extension to Pvt Cloud
Cloud SDO Survey
Cloud P2P Video StreaminG
draft-hoff-cloudaudit
draft-golovinsky-cloudlog-*
draft-morrow-cloud-resource-mobility-*
draft-johnston-http-*
draft-dunbar-arp-for-large-dc-*
draft-ning-vepc-requirements
draft-khasnabish-cloud-survey-00.txt
draft-wei-dewar-cloud-video-sreaming-?
Hoff, Johnston et al
Golovinsky, Johnston
Morrow et al
Johnston et al
Dunbar
Ning et al
Khasnabish et al
Wei et al
It was agreed that we will complete the Internet Drafts from the presentation during IETF-78 Clouds bar
BoF for distribution for comments to clouds@ietf.org by mid-Oct.2010.
And then, we will revise and publish these Drafts by Monday, 01-November-2010 for Clouds mtg
(propose a BoF) during IETF-79 in Beijing, China during 7-12 Nov., 2010.
The following drafts have been proposed (to Bhumip) by the authors after the Clouds bar BoF session on
Thursday, 29-July-2010.




VNM Model for PaaS
Telecom net Virtualization
Cloud WorkItem Industry gap
CloudDesktop

Cloud Use cases
draft-okita-opsawg-vnetmodel
Okita (Hitachi)
draft- Yokota-telecom-virtualization-? Yokota et al (KDDI)
draft-Khasnabish-cloud-Industry-gap-? Khasnabish et al
draft-wang-clouds-virtual-desktop-?
W. Jun (ZTE) and
P. Jin (ChinaMobile, TBC)
draft-Khasnabish-cloud-use-cases-?
Khasnabish et al
====================END of IETF-78 Clouds bar BoF meeting minutes======================
Contact: vumip1@gmail.com
Tuesday, 31-August-2010
Clouds bar BoF during IETF-78, July, 2010
Page 8 of 8