| | 70 | '''Ilia Baldine''' described the compute ontology. |
| | 71 | His next step is to encode it in NDL and merge that into his RSpec-to-NDL converter. |
| | 72 | |
| | 73 | Comments included |
| | 74 | - PG makes the hardware type and the available images orthogonal. May need to define subclouds. Needs investigation. |
| | 75 | - Unknown shortcuts requested at an AM Should fail or be ignored. |
| | 76 | - Shortcuts could be organized by features. |
| | 77 | |
| | 78 | '''Max Ott''' argued for several improvements: |
| | 79 | - use adaptations to make properties of the underlying fabric be constrains on the connecting AMs |
| | 80 | - model component lifecycle |
| | 81 | - keep the object model separate from its meaning |
| | 82 | - group resources |
| | 83 | - measurements must be in terms of same resources (coordinate with the I&M group) |
| | 84 | |
| | 85 | '''Hongwei Zhang''' described LENS, a representation of wireless sensor networks that explicitly represents all properties, including observables. |
| | 86 | |
| | 87 | '''Mike Zink''' described the problem of representing storage resources - both in the cloud and attached to compute resources. He plans to start by representing cloud resources (as in Amazon S3/EBS), building a simple model and an RSpec extension. |
| | 88 | |
| | 89 | Comments indicated the importance of representing security, how the storage is accessed (iSCSI?), and including basic properties like capacity in the UML. |
| | 90 | |
| | 91 | === Proposed Next Steps === |
| | 92 | - Evolve ontologies as needed |
| | 93 | - Develop storage and wireless ontologies |
| | 94 | - Further rollout of support for GENI RSpec schema |
| | 95 | - Adopt AM API revisions |
| | 96 | - Move GENI RSpec schemas to the geni.net namespace |
| | 97 | |
