Updated 2:20 p.m. PDT, with comment from Microsoft and at 2:35 with more details on where that draft came from.
For those who want to find out what all the cloud-computing fuss is about, a copy of the Open Cloud Manifesto is now online.
After a flowery introduction, the document talks about a couple of key concepts, including the ability for data and applications from one cloud vendor to be able to be ported to another cloud vendor. It also calls for interoperability from one cloud vendor to another, as well as consistent ways to meter and monitor performance and usage.
"Without standards, the ability to bring systems back in-house or choose another cloud provider will be limited by proprietary interfaces. Once an organization builds or ports a system to use a cloud provider's offerings, bringing that system back in-house will be difficult and expensive," the manifesto states.
It ends by issuing six principles of an "Open Cloud."
While the goals all sound laudable, it's easy to see how this might prove challenging for those with existing cloud platforms, folks like Amazon and Microsoft.1. Cloud providers must work together to ensure that the challenges to cloud adoption (security, integration, portability, interoperability, governance/management, metering/monitoring) are addressed through open collaboration and the appropriate use of standards.
2. Cloud providers must not use their market position to lock customers into their particular platforms and limiting (sic) their choice of providers.
3. Cloud providers must use and adopt existing standards wherever appropriate. The IT industry has invested heavily in existing standards and standards organizations; there is no need to duplicate or reinvent them.
4. When new standards (or adjustments to existing standards) are needed, we must be judicious and pragmatic to avoid creating too many standards. We must ensure that standards promote innovation and do not inhibit it.
5. Any community effort around the open cloud should be driven by customer needs, not merely the technical needs of cloud providers, and should be tested or verified against real customer requirements.
6. Cloud-computing standards organizations, advocacy groups, and communities should work together and stay coordinated, making sure that efforts do not conflict or overlap.
Still, the document's authors suggest that there is room for discussion.
"This document is meant to begin the conversation, not define it," the manifesto says in its conclusion. Well, it has certainly done that.
Update: I had a chance to speak Friday afternoon with Steven Martin, the senior director who wrote Microsoft's initial blog post taking issue with the manifesto and the way it was developed.
In a telephone interview, Martin didn't point to any specific clause that Microsoft disagreed with, but said there were areas whose intent the software maker would have needed to better understand before signing.
Martin said IBM approached Microsoft about joining, but only after the document was finalized and the company had already started briefing press and analysts.
"I think a reasonable person could question the motive there," he said, suggesting that the fact Microsoft was approached at all strikes him as more of a PR tactic than anything else.
That said, Martin said Microsoft would like to be a part of the dialogue. He noted that the company was subsequently invited to a meeting of some cloud-computing participants to take place on Monday as part of a cloud-computing conference.
"We have accepted that invitation and we will participate," Martin said. "If there is meaningful dialogue, it is something we will want to play a role in. Hopefully we will use that as a chance to restart that conversation."
As for the origins of that document we saw online, it was apparently posted by the Thinking Out Cloud blog.
"I received the document from four different sources and am under no obligation to keep it secret, so I am happy to publish it here for the first time," Thinking Out Cloud said on its site.
Updated with a link to the Open Cloud Manifesto document.
The cloud-computing field may be in its infancy, but there is a fight breaking out at the preschool.
A group of Web services providers, reportedly including IBM, is set to unveil a "manifesto" next week that lays out a number of principles for open cloud computing. Two of the biggest names in the field, though, say they aren't signing on.
Microsoft posted blog message to that effect on Wednesday night, while Amazon.com on Friday said it, too, is not among the companies signing the document.
"Like other ideas on standards and practices, we'll review this one," Amazon said in a statement. "Ideas on openness and standards have been talked about for years in Web services. And we do believe standards will continue to evolve in the cloud-computing space. But what we've heard from customers thus far, customers who are really committed to using the cloud, is that the best way to illustrate openness and customer flexibility is by what you actually provide and deliver for them."
Amazon noted that over the past three years, it has made its Web services available on different operating systems and programming languages.
Microsoft, for its part, said there were some things it agreed with in the manifesto, but others that were either too vague or did not reflect its interests. The company also objected to the fact that it was shown the document just last weekend, not allowed to make changes, and given just 48 hours to decide whether to sign.
"We were admittedly disappointed by the lack of openness in the development of the (Open) Cloud Manifesto," Microsoft's Steven Martin wrote in the blog post. "What we heard was that there was no desire to discuss, much less implement, enhancements to the document, despite the fact that we have learned through direct experience. Very recently, we were privately shown a copy of the document, warned that it was a secret, and told that it must be signed 'as is,' without modifications or additional input."
Martin wrote that "it appears to us that one company, or just a few companies, would prefer to control the evolution of cloud computing, as opposed to reaching a consensus across key stakeholders (including cloud users) through an 'open' process."
Although the document has yet to be released, one of its proponents, Enomaly's Reuven Cohen, has said it will be will be released on Monday. In a blog post, Cohen suggests that there will be at least a dozen signatories of the document, including "several of the largest technology companies."
"The manifesto does not speak to application code or licensing but instead to the fundamental principles that the Internet was founded upon--an open platform available to all," Cohen said. "It is a call to action for the worldwide cloud community to get involved and embrace the principles of the open cloud."
Cohen also posted a follow-up blog thanking Microsoft for the attention generated by the rejection of the manifesto.
"In one move, Microsoft has provided more visibility to our cloud interoperability effort than all our previous efforts combined," Cohen wrote.
As for the manifesto itself, we'll have to wait until Monday to see it, but Cohen's blog and this site give some idea where they are headed.
Update at 1:30 p.m. Friday: Turns out, the manifesto is even more open than we thought. We found it online here. For more information on the Open Cloud Manifesto, read our first take.
- prev
- 1
- next
