We had two days of QoS sessions in Berlin. Since there was only 1 1/2 days of presentations our scope was limited, but our goal was to find out about what efforts are going on in the industry in terms of QoS initiatives in the areas of: standards, edge technologies, and real-time.The first day was an open (webcast) session. The second day was a closed session with the morning devoted to a joint real-time session, also web cast, and the afternoon session was closed to Task Force members for working on the vision, roadmap, working groups, next steps etc.
The Presentations are now up on the web. Sorry, but we only allow access
to the presentations to members of the QoS Task Force. Please contact
Sally Long s.long@opengroup.org or Birgit Hartje b.hartje@opengroup.org
if you are not a member and would like to learn more about membership.
The URL for the presentations is: http://www.opengroup.org/mem_only/councils/q201/ Click
on forums button, and from there on Quality of Service Session
During the working sessions, both the morning working session with the Real-Time
Group and the afternoon session with QoS members only, we came up with some
objectives and what I believe a more focused way of meeting them.
The outline of a Roadmap took a very general approach, but one that we can move
forward with in small pieces.
Working under the premise that there is a lot of existing work out there and
our goal is not to duplicate efforts but to adopt and evolve where appropriate
and to initiate only when necessary, one of our objectives as a Task Force is
to determine where our members would benefit most from applying our time and
resources.
The Definition Phase is where we define what is out there by populating our
component map with existing QoS standards and initiatives so our members are
aware of what choices need to be made and where the holes are. This will
allow us to make more informed decisions as to where to put our collective and
individual resources. Part of The Definition Phase is also producing a
White Paper and a Draft RoadMap. The task of populating the Component
Model or the "Topology" will be broken off into logical chunks according to
appropriate working groups, which have been re-organized for more efficient
division of labor
The Evaluation Phase will entail determining which of the standards/initiatives
most meet the needs of our customers' & vendors' requirements and
priorities. In order to do that we will evaluate the standards/initiatives
in terms of: 1) What does the standard/policy achieve and how well does it apply
to members's requirements and priorities, 2) What Level of Support & Market
Adoption exists (i.e. is there an existing working group, who's involved, what
state is the specification in (draft/standard/revision), 3) Are there implementations
( prototype, beta, major revisions?) 4) Whose implementing and is it according
to specification 5) Are they interoperable etc.
The Decision Phase will, given what is discovered in the Evaluation Phase, be
one where we determine: 1) Which existing standardization efforts
should we support via gathering & driving requirements? 2) Which
consortia to have partner with and how closely to work with? 3) Whether we should
Initiate efforts to increase market awareness and adoption of QoS solutions?
4) When we should Initiate efforts to provide testing and certification for
existing standards? 4)Whether it makes more sense to initiate new efforts for
QoS architecture, standards, policies? The Final Road Map is also part of this
Phase.
The Implementation Phase is where we start implementing the Decisions we make
in Q3.
In order to accomplish this in a reasonable time frame and to keep all members
actively engaged, it was decided we would move away from the technical/business
Working Groups we had initially decided on,and instead move toward specific
working groups where each organization involved would be spending their time
on something worth-while to their participation and more closely affiliated
with the value they hope to get out of this. These individual groups will
be working on populating the component map/ topology during the definition phase
according to their own areas of expertise. I am hoping that by interjecting
division of labor according to interest will get more accomplished.
The new working groups are:
We agreed that each group would meet independently and work within
their groups to complete action items. I am to provide guidelines for
the population activities and the action items listed below for each group.
The Architecture/Topology and the Business Working Groups will act as the working
groups that provide consistency and validation to individual groups and who
will pull the information together in a cohesive whole.
In general the action items for the working groups are to: