I agree with you. I'm not in MVCE but I don't have any issues with them or
their funding structure as it doesn't impact on any of what I'm doing. I
raised the NGWN document as I felt there might be some points in it that
would also be applicable to FIND, and also because whether we like it or
not, EPSRC appear to view two communities, and want to have a collected
response from both (at least this is what I've been informed).
We should keep the hardware virtualisation thing going - it looks like much
more fun ;-)
Br,
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: Next Generation Networking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Jon Crowcroft
Sent: 03 May 2007 15:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: and now FIND...
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
|