Wikis > Hybrid Multi-Cloud > January 19, 2017 – Meeting Notes

ONUG Open Hybrid Cloud Working Group–January 19, 2017 Meeting Notes

BY BOB WYSOCKI, GE

Team – great conversation this week – we have a plan that will set us up for success for Spring ONUG; now it is just on us to execute!

EXEC SUMMARY

AWS and Microsoft have agreed to send representation to ONUG Spring Apr 25/26 in San Fran at UCSF

  • Providers will be asked to respond to cross-industry requirements and challenges around on-boarding and lifecycle management of enterprise applications into public cloud
  • Google and IBM Softlayer have both been invited as 3rd participant
  • INPUT SOUGHT (1 of 2): Please reply-to-all if you have a preference of Google or IBM as 3rd provider to participate

INPUT SOUGHT (2 of 2): Each HCWG member should consider their priorities and environment and share your top 5 barriers/gaps to onboarding of workloads into cloud; Less is more – don’t feel you have to provide 5; just your top issues

  1. Issue that you are facing – give short description such that anyone reading this independently will have a good understanding of it
  2. Map this Barrier to Hybrid Cloud Framework – in which area of the framework are you experiencing the barrier (Cloud provider, Broker, Internal Infra/Process)
    Framework located at http://www.onug.net/onug-content-downloads/
  3. Succinctly describe the business impact that this limitation is having on your business – what benefits is it preventing you from reaching; what do you currently have to do to get around this barrier
  4. Express what you might expect from Cloud Providers as a solution to this barrier
    Responses should be sent by COB Mon Jan 30th: please reply to the whole group emailing your response to hybridcloud@opennetworkingusergroup.com so we can see each other’s responses

I will collate responses for our next meeting on Thu Feb 2nd 1pm US eastern; Next meeting: we will review HCWG input and multi-vote to consolidate responses

DETAILS
Plan for Next ONUG: Share top 5 concerns/barriers with Cloud providers 1 month before Spring meeting; Give each provider 20 min each with 10 min Q&A;

  • Reconvene at end of event: what did we learn; were the responses something we can we work with, or what needs to change with the providers

Carlos – kicked off of WG & ensuing discussion

– Focus will be to collaborate, bring in ideas… open forum – we all contribute with ideas, new things to bring up
– In responding with top barriers – Feel free to include technical as well as non-technical issues – (eg, compliance concerns, contracts/lock-in, organizational challenges)
– Example pain points discussed during call

• Lack of common mechanism to deploy to multiple cloud providers
 Would be helpful to have same semantics when provisioning minimum set of commodity services (core compute, storage, NW, identity/access mgmt) – understand differentiating/higher-value-added services would be different
 In rush to get to cloud, we are building our apps using Cloud-proprietary mechanisms/api’s/security services on top that create lock-in, and will prevent ease of portability in the future to another provider
 Lack of common data model to consume services – even covering most broad 80% of commodity services would help us focus our resources on remaining 20% vs re-learn new Provider mechanism on 80% non-differentiated
 Lack of common TCO model to compare public/private cloud
 Nick working with Eric at 451… asked them to do real-world TCO analysis around workload in private cloud vs public cloud – a model that people can buy into, make their own choice

• Will look for ONUG members to offer resources/people to speak anonymously to help them craft real model based on our collective experience to date

• Analogy: Nutrional facts label… food says 200 calories – but where are details of where these come from

• Need standard/detailed model to do cost comparison between public, private – huge barrier – truth in advertising
 Cloud resource itself may save money but what about when you add services on top to secure it
 Lean/Agile POC’s are difficult
 Business wants to do POC but in order to try, we need to secure it anyway – green $ out the door to do POC – not same as startup doing non-regulated – may take 4-5 months to do regulated POC

• Cloud Providers should be more holistic in educating businesses about what is needed to secure services and be compliant
 Can’t sell us on use of cheap infra resources but then not assist in pointing out/educating what is required to meet risk/compliance controls – need more help here

Meeting Attendees:
Andy Lee – Principal Kaiser Permante; projects – build out Cloud IC nw using Equinix exchange
Carlos Matos – Fidelity Investments – leads Infra Arch team – part of public/private cloud arch, including services, ext/int platforms
Harmette Shanny- N Networks, working on hybrid cloud
Jim Yunam – UPS – R&D on long horizon strategic tech for biz disruptions
Linda Dunbar – Huawei – Cloud VPN Solutions – looking to see rqmts from diff end user community and how to support them
Michale Eckhoff – HV Virtual Cloud – Citigroup – replacing Ali on HCWG
Michale Winston – Dir Global NW Arch at 1st Data – in process of build Cloud Connector zone in infra, look at Cloud Exchange for retail customers
Nelson Tai – Pfizer – global nw engineering – expand cloud connectivity globally across regions – look for ideas, what services, strategies
Sunil Patel – Gap, deploying Cloud, Equinix – live on Azure, looking at others
Ted Turner – Performance Analysis at Intuit – move apps not customer-facing to cloud, couple components get closer to edge, do caching at edge
Bob Wysocki – VP Network Edge Product Engineering – build out Cloud meet-me at Equinix currently connected to AWS, Azure/O365, Virtustream; in engagement with Oracle
Nick Lippis – ONUG Leader
Jeannette Tibbits – Nick’s EA