Alan,
thank you for the sneak preview.
this author continues to be
troubled by the lack of attention given to networking grid
sites
Hereafter my own solace to that troubling thought. With Grids still
trying to break through mainstream adoption and validation in the F500, I
believe that the networking ecosystem (vendors, providers ...) is moving
in several directions to fill the pipeline now in preparation for
tomorrow's scaling of Grids. There are several stepping stones, which are
not necessarily labeled as "Grid" steps (e.g., virtualization)
and can serve several purposes. Some of these stepping stones call for
prep activities within a number of SDOs (not just GGF), whereas others
possibly call for internal re-structuring of operations (e.g., greater
horizontal integration, greater L4-7 engagement, etc.).
Also, the Grid movement has originated in a HPC reality blessed with
plentiful ad-hoc networks and ad-hoc operation of the same. While it has
grown by leaps and bounds since then, we don't seem to have heard enough
real-life use case stories to balance off that original view, especially
when it comes to utilization of the network. Hence the continued quest
for use cases with a documented strong network pull (within telco-cg, and
the ghpn-rg prior to that).
There was no discussion of this
at all at the Grid VIP Summit
I will be looking for the minutes to find out what does make
it to these VIPs' short list of to-do's.
no follow-up from last October's
OIF-GGF grid networking workshop
Since last October when I presented at the OIF, I have kept regular
communication with the OIF (GHPN hat on). At the Telco-CG interim meeting
at Supercomm, an OIF representative (Jonathan Sadler) responded to my
invitation and gave a live account of the OIF Supercomm 05 demo, which
breaks new grounds in multi-vendor dynamic provisioning while showing
quite an impressive roster of participants. The GGF attendees resonated
with the Grid potential. There is a plan to work on an action register
that is of mutual appeal to OIF and GGF.
and no resolution of the rampant
confusion at the GGF14 Telco Community Group
meeting
"rampant confusion" reads to me as a fairly severe
judgement of the 1st official meeting of a newly chartered group, when
there is nothing written down in a draft document just yet, and purposely
so.
The GGF and the Telco CG are a volunteer army. I hope that we continue to
enlist your support and contributions. I appreciated your kicking off a
discussion and bringing us back from summer vacations.
-franco
At 08:41 PM 7/27/2005, Alan Weissberger wrote:
All Telco CG members,
Thought this might be of interest to the telco cg mail list, expecially
since nothing besides the GGF14 minutes have been posted there so
far.
Best..
alan Weissberger
The extract below is in the closing comments section of the
article:
On a different thread, this author continues to be troubled by the lack
of attention given to networking grid sites -even within a single
organization grid. There was no discussion of this at all at the
Grid VIP Summit, no follow-up from last October's OIF-GGF grid networking
workshop, and no resolution of the rampant confusion at the GGF14
Telco Community Group meeting (see meeting report at
<http://news.taborcommunications.com/msgget.jsp?mid=418119&xsl=story.xsl>
).
While the US government funded TeraGrid project provides 10-30 G
bit/sec interconnections between grid sites, nothing close to that is
feasible in the commercial or enterprise grid world. Not only would
such high speed connections be prohibitively expensive for the enterprise
customer, but not even a fraction of that bandwidth is generally
available for nationwide connections - at any price!
The enterprise grid user must try to match the 1/10 G bit/sec Ethernet
connections in his data center and campus network with what is available
in the metro and wide area networks. Today, most commercial
users interconnect grid sites using private lines- often by leasing
DS3/E3 or dark fiber- at much lower rates than their campus LAN
backbones. But there are limits to connectivity and scalability
with this approach and the burden of managing the network is on the
enterprise.
What role will the telcos play in grid networking? The driving factor
for a telco grid network service offering will be to effectively use the
assets it already owns and to realize a reasonable return on investment.
What type of network service (point to point, IP packet, Ethernet virtual
private line or virtual private LAN, etc), at what speeds, and with what
QoS/ SLAs would generate the highest take rate, revenue and ROI for the
telco? What price should be charged for such a service? Is there an
elasticity of demand in such an offering?
Many other questions arise. When grids move from regional to
national to global, how will they then be interconnected? Will it be a
seamless evolution/ migration or disruptive? When a single
organization grid is opened up to collaborators, partner companies, and
customers (as John Hurley of Boeing suggested) how will network access be
achieved? Where will the enterprise grid networking specifications and
best practices recommendations be developed? What type of network
topology and connectivity arrangement works best for the majority of
industry grids? Will that network technology adequately scale to
accommodate more sites, more users, or more servers at any one site? What
about disaster recovery? Finally, who will be the primary grid network
provider - the user (or community of users), the grid hardware vendor
(IBM, HP, SUN), or the network facility vendor (BT)?
Unless some answers emerge soon, grids are likely to be confined to a
single campus network with 1/10Gig Ethernet links used for
interconnection. This limits the size of the grid market, because it
excludes interconnection of multiple, geographically dispersed grid
sites. We are astonished that the telcos (with the exception of BT)
are not more inquisitive and proactive in the emerging grid networking
market and wonder if they are not missing out on a significant new source
of revenue.