[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Vrs-development] VRS and SEE/DEE goals

From: Tim Terlegård
Subject: Re: [Vrs-development] VRS and SEE/DEE goals
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 19:25:05 +0100

> I can't help you much with the SEE/DEE goals, Tim.
> There is not much documentation about it.

I've noticed. I initially thought this list was used for both VRS and SEE, 
but I guess it's really just for VRS...

> tell you is that it is more oriented to ASP model of
> Webservices.  The twist is that provisions are made
> for a user to remove their personal data from an ASP
> provider and server it up on their local machine.
> The VRS goals begin with running those services on
> your local machine.  If additional resources are
> needed for the particular services, mostly bandwitdh
> and presence, the you can expand into a cluster.
> The overlap is 'running webservices on a local
> machine'.  Weither it's done as a last resort, as in
> SEE/DEE, or first resort, as in VRS, the task is the
> same.

Why restrict things to "VRS: only run web services on local machine" or "SEE: 
only run web services on the ASP server"? Why not have the freedom to choose 
where the web services will run? Wouldn't that result in increased 
flexibility? If the ASP wants to bill the users, fine, SEE could just 
implement billing on top of VRS.

I also guess that both VRS and SEE want replication, fault tolerance and 
other features of distributed systems. Both projects want to be able to 
distribute power and space. Both wants to provide security. Both projects' 
main purpose is to enable the use of webservices in a secure and fault 
tolerant way. I think the projects essentially are the same. Where am I wrong?

> The system aims for the following goals:
> * To allow a user complete control over the content
> and access to personal data as webservices

An ASP doesn't fit very well here, I realize that. But it says "allow", so I 
guess the VRS will allow private data to be stored on a central server. That 
is, VRS can be used by an ASP?

As I said, my english is not perfect, but I'd prefer something like "Allowing 
users to have complete control over the content and access to personal data. 
Access to the content is achieved by using web services.".

Does it explicitly have to be _web_ services? Isn't just services enough? To 
me, web services are handled by a web server. Why enforce a web server? In 
VRS you can't use Corba for calling a service? Maybe only XML-RPC will be 
used, but a design that allows any protocol, wouldn't that be nice? What if 
one find that XML is shit and one wants to use Corba instead?

> * To maximize reliable availability of webservices

What's "reliable availability"? I'd say "Maximizing reliability and 
availability of webservices.". By the way, is it webservice, Webservice or 
Web Service?

> * To maximize the security and privacy of data.

I'd say "Maximizing security, i.e. providing non-repudiation and privacy and 
authenticity of the data residing in the VRS system."

> * To provide choice of participation and service
> selection

I'm not sure what kind of participation is meant, but I guess it's about 
being a part of a cluster, providing computer power? Honestly, I don't know 
what you mean by "service selection" either  :/

> As you said, that covers it in a nutsheel in my mind,
> without getting wordy.  And the rest of the material
> there does get wordy  :)

Indeed  :-)

-- Tim

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]