On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Aaron Coburn <acob...@amherst.edu> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>>> will propose it on the general incubator list.  The areas we need to
>>>>>> work on are in bold.  We need to define the project description and
>>>>>> scope.  I wrote this as "dynamically provisioning and brokering remote
>>>>>> access to compute resources".  Thoughts?
>>>> I'm not sure I would not really understand the scope of VCL from that 
>>>> statement.
>>> I agree more should be added.  I kept it short since the example
>>> resolutions suggested on the graduation guide page are very short and
>>> general:
>>> ofbiz: "open-source software related to enterprise automation"
>>> Can we just use the description then?:
>>> "open-source software related to a modular cloud computing platform
>>> which dynamically provisions and brokers remote access to compute
>>> resources"
>>  I think this is reasonable - but have a *minor* quibble -
>>  The bulk of what the VCL does (auth/auth, reservations, image
>> storage, image loading, ...) seems to me to be fall under the
>> "provisions" concept - but "brokers" seems to be getting equal
>> emphasis even though it is an added capability. It's an important
>> added capability, but perhaps this slight revision might help:
> I don't have a strong opinion about this, but I have always understood 
> "provisioning" to relate to the infrastructure for image storage, capture and 
> loading while "brokering" relates to connecting the virtualization or blade 
> back-end to a user's request, which would include such things as 
> authentication, authorization, reservations, scheduling, etc. I think the two 
> are pretty equal in importance.
> Just my $0.02
> -Aaron C

That's what I was thinking.

Reply via email to