i am not sure why there is a distinction between the communities - i do wireless stuff - i dont see
many of the MVCE people at Infocom/Mobicom/Mobisys/Mobihoc where we tend to publish
and we have always done some hardware (at ucl and cambridge in CS) and
noadays, with FPGAs and SDR, i dont see the distinction...
i just see a seperation of groups (not topics) because the MVCE has a funding structure
whereas the rest of the networking community
are
more, shall we say, ad hoc about it:)
btw:
xen influenced the way Intel and AMD do trusted processors and hardware
virtualisation,
so in a way we do one better than click:)...
In missive <000901c78d54$6e9646a0$0200a8c0@MARSHALL>, Alan typed:
>>Dear David, Jon and all,
>>
>>Re: engaging with mobile VCE
>>
>>Last summer the next generation wireless networks group (which =
>>essentially
>>came out of mobile VCE) had a town hall meeting that resulted in a =
>>strategy
>>document that outlines their visions for the challenges in wireless
>>communications up to 2020, see
>>
>>http://www.ngwnet.ac.uk/files/NGWN_summary.pdf
>>
>>A few of us (e.g. Dave Parish and I) who are involved in both =
>>communities
>>were involved in putting together parts of this document (section 4).
>>Although much of this document might be regarded as very low level from =
>>a
>>networking community perspective, I feel there are a number of issues =
>>and
>>opportunities identified in it that are common to both communities.
>>
>>Like NGN, this community intends to approach EPSRC (most likely John and
>>Nafeesa), and I suspect that they will almost certainly tell both
>>communities to engage with each other.=20
>>
>>
>>
>>OK, for my 10c input, I think that if we are considering a future =
>>internet
>>that has ubiquitous access, or a multitude of types of access =
>>(particularly
>>over wireless networks), then managing trust and reputation become key
>>issues. I may be wrong but I don't see this being covered in GENI/FIND =
>>at
>>present.=20
>>Additionally, one might consider how to design networks (not end =
>>systems)
>>that are tolerant to certain levels of intrusion/ attack (this would be
>>particularly relevant to wide area wireless, and wireless mesh networks
>>which in the future might be expected to operate under the threat of
>>constant or persistent attacks). This is kind of mentioned by FIND in
>>"...will address requirements such as core functionalities, security,
>>robustness, openness, economic utility, and social needs as well as =
>>support
>>for new technologies and services.", but this is extremely general and I
>>think it could be greatly clarified/expanded. =20
>>
>>Finally, on the subject of Click/ xen etc, I work with a well-known FPGA
>>company that are now able to directly synthesise from Click to their
>>programmable hardware (for me it beats programming NPUs every time), =
>>shame
>>we don't have this for xen, or do we?
>>
>>
>>I hope this helps, and doesn=92t ruffle too many feathers.
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Next Generation Networking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf =
>>Of
>>Ian Wakeman
>>Sent: 01 May 2007 23:17
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: and now FIND...
>>
>>Jon, Chris, all,
>>
>>Those involved in organising Cosener's this year need to consider what
>>John says about engaging with the Ubicomp and MVCE folks -- with some
>>thought about how we would all fit into the space ...
>>
>>I like Chris's suggestions of inviting Dave Clark (or someone else?) and
>>Andrew Herbert.
>>
>>Meanwhile, can those of you who have indicated you'd like to be involved
>>in responding to the NSF people send me a few words about what you'd
>>like included: Chris and Jon have started the ball rolling with their
>>initial thoughts.
>>
>>And I will contact John Hand and Nafeesa Simjee at the EPSRC to tell
>>them about this.
>>
>>Regards,
>>David
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Next Generation Networking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>>Of Jon Crowcroft
>>Sent: 01 May 2007 08:28
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: and now FIND...
>>
>>virtualisation is a tool - not a problem - i outlined 3 problems not
>>addressed by GENI/FIND (much) two at least of which might be addressed
>>by virtualisation, (business models and control of unwanted traffic),
>>and the third (infrastructure free wireless wide area networks ) might
>>use virtualisation as part of resource management (e.g. spectrum -
>>doncha just love the idea of virtual spectrum - kind of like abstracting
>>thin air)=20
>>
>>by the way, andrew didn't explicitly outline it, but the combination of
>>xen and xorp is quite widespread in the network virtualisation emergent
>>community (there are other choices for network/OS virtualised stack,
>>but even those, e.g. click, include some of xen or vservers or some way
>>to get a higher level management API)
>>
>>oh, and while I am whingeing:
>>a big problem i have with coseners recently is the lack of (well,
>>decreasing) engagement with the ubicomp and and mobile VCE community
>>
>>In missive <[log in to unmask]>, Chris Cooper typed:
>>
>> >>Jon,
>> >>
>> >>Sounds more like the initial items of a programme to complement FIND?
>> >>
>> >>I'd also emphasise virtualization (as Andrew's Networkshop talk and
>>one >>or two of the funded FIND projects) and location independent
>>access - an >>aspect of Jon's item 3. (I like the thought of combining
>>virtualization >>and Bob Kahn's 'Transient Network Architecture'.)
>>>>Even more, I'd add items at the application enabling level - how to
>>>>enable Jon's 'good guy hackers' (while fixing the bad guys, of
>>course), >>since the IP internet is driven by the layers above.
>> >>
>> >>So, why not fly Dave Clark over for Coseners and have a session on
>>this?
>> >>And to help emphasise 'higher layers' (Web2.1 or is that DIY grid
>>>>middleware, etc?), Andrew Herbert could be invited to make an
>>appearance >>to celebrate inaugural funding from Microsoft? No?
>> >>
>> >>(And Level 0 should enable access to or parallel facilities to GENI?)
>>>> >>Best wishes, >>Chris >> >>Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>> >>> of course, i might have screwed up any relations we might have with
>>FIND/GENI with my comments in today's >>> guadian podcast:
>> >>>
>>http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/podcasts/2007/04/science_weekly_for_april_30
>>.html
>> >>>
>> >>> :-)
>> >>>
>> >>> In missive <002201c78b0e$71b0be80$0102a8c0@MARSHALL>, Alan typed:
>> >>>
>> >>> >>I agree with Ian. EPSRC are expecting directions from this
>>community, and >>> >>engaging with NSF on their FIND programme looks
>>like it will help provide >>> >>some of this direction. Also, I think
>>this type of engagement was one of the >>> >>recommendations from the
>>recent International review of ICT that was >>> >>commissioned by
>>EPRSRC.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>"Recommendations:
>> >>> >>EPSRC should actively reach out to the US NSF, NIH and DARPA to
>>establish >>> >>joint funding of projects. This should include
>>exchanges between agency >>> >>programme and project managers as well
>>as joint sponsored workshops for >>> >>researchers. There are also
>>some large US initiatives that encourage >>> >>collaborations"
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Seems to me that this would fit the bill.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>I would be happy to contribute to a response.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Best regards,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Alan Marshall
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>> >>From: Next Generation Networking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>>Behalf Of >>> >>Ian Wakeman >>> >>Sent: 30 April 2007 10:41 >>>
>>>>To: [log in to unmask] >>> >>Subject: Re: and now FIND...
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Jon, all,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>I agree with us making a joint response and will be happy
>>coordinating >>> >>it -- I have in mind that we'll concurrently
>>approach the EPSRC to >>> >>update them on the 'level 0' network
>>progress and to broach the subject >>> >>of a special initiative on
>>networking research.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Can I have a 'show of hands' from those of you interested in
>>responding?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Regards,
>> >>> >>David
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>> >>From: Next Generation Networking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>>Behalf >>> >>Of Jon Crowcroft >>> >>Sent: 30 April 2007 06:59 >>>
>>>>To: [log in to unmask] >>> >>Subject: and now FIND...
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>does the UK NGN community want to have a coordinated response?
>> >>> >>i think so....
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>anyone want to volunteer to coordinate it?
>> >>> >>(not me:)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>see below
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>------- Forwarded Message
>> >>> >>Subject: Collaboration on Future Internet Architectures >>>
>>>>Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:53:14 -0400 >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>>>Call for Research Collaboration on Future Internet Architectures in
>>>>> >>Partnership with the US NSF FIND Program >> >>[....] >> >>>
>>>>> cheers >>>=20
>> >>> jon
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>------------------------------------------------------
>> >>Prof Christopher (Chris) S Cooper
>> >>Visiting Professor at Oxford Brookes University >>Consultant to
>>UKERNA
>> >>Tel: +44 (0)1854 613727 (answerphone)
>> >>Email: [log in to unmask] / [log in to unmask]
>> >>Mobile: +44 (0)7880 730677
>> >>http://cms.brookes.ac.uk/staff/ChrisCooper/
>> >>Personal email: [log in to unmask] >> >>Address for all
>>correspondence:
>> >>Rivendell
>> >>Garve Road
>> >>Ullapool
>> >>Wester Ross IV26 2SX
>> >>
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> jon
>>
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.=20
>>Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/781 - Release Date: =
>>30/04/2007
>>09:14
>>=20
>>
>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.=20
>>Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/785 - Release Date: =
>>02/05/2007
>>14:16
>>=20
cheers
jon
|
