Glenn Seiler

OpenSAF Developer Days 2009

I just returned from the second annual OpenSAF Developers Days. This was a two-day event that included discussions on the latest developments in the project, some of the new standards that have been defined by the Service Availability Forum and the project's road map plans for the next release. The event was hosted by Huawei at their corporate headquarters in Shenzhen, China. One of the reasons the project choose to do the event in China this year is because they wanted it to be accessible to the ever-increasing number of development teams in Asia Pacific. From the turnout I would have to say this was a very successful event. The event was attended by major TEMs from Europe, North America and Asia Pacific, as well as by leading platform providers and operating system vendors.

In case you are not familiar with OpenSAF, it is an open source implementation of the Service Availability Forum's (SAF) standard for application high availability. Specifically it is based on the Application Interface Specification (AIS) but also adds other capabilities that are key for high availability such as hardware interface and system management. The project is 100 percent open source and uses the LGPL license. The OpenSAF project is about two years old now, however it was changed to the LGPL license in January 2008 and since then has experienced significant growth. There were over 200 individual contributions in 2008, which is the sign of a strong, active community. OpenSAF is being developed into LTE gateways; IMS servers and other core and edge devices and some of the devices are in operator networks today.

As with any new project, there are doubters about the success of OpenSAF. The most common objection I hear is why would an equipment provider switch from their legacy, field-tested and fully integrated HA solution to this new OpenSAF technology? Actually there are many reasons but it always boils down to the benefits that companies receive with open source. Staying with your legacy software may have short-term advantages; you can get that current project out faster, you don't have to modify or port your applications and your developers are familiar with it. But in the long run companies always benefit from leveraging a community of developers, the fast innovation of open source, the ecosystem of a standards-based solution and the flexibility of suppliers. We have all seen this with Linux for the operating system and then with Eclipse for tools. High Availability is now commonly regarded as a standard component of a Carrier Grade Base Platform and the inevitability of open source HA software being combined with open source Linux to create this base platform is undeniable. For some companies it will take longer than others but it is just a matter of time.

Some of the most interesting sessions at the Developer Days event were discussions about the newer SAF standards for platform management (PLM) and software management framework (SMF). Integrating software management (in place or hitless upgrades) and hardware management (monitoring and managing HW failures) into an overall HA solution completes the Carrier Grade Base Platform. Both PLM and SMF are relatively new standards that the OpenSAF project is looking at for the next release. Another interesting discussion was around creating more modularity for the project. Initially the OpenSAF code was pretty monolithic and this made the code unwieldy for some projects or devices. Not all devices need the same amount of availability, so creating modularity around services with inter-dependencies allows for much more flexible deployment. It seems to be clear that the project has made great progress in the last year, and from the look of the information presented at Developer Days, the remainder of 2009 and 2010 seem to be poised for great success. All the presentations from Developer Days are available on the OpenSAF website.

Green Linux and Green Telecom – Where do they intersect?

Green, green, everything is green. It is spring now, the hills around Silicon Valley are bright and green and everything in the yard is in full bloom. Even in our jobs everything is green in these times. You can’t watch TV or listen to the news or read a press release without hearing about Green. And of course this is all for very good reasons – even if we were in a good economy we would still have to start taking measures to reduce the energy we consume and conserve power and resources.

You may have heard a lot about Green Telecom, and like many of today’s catch phrases it can mean a lot of different things. One aspect of Green Telecom that you read a lot about is the use of alternative energy to drive base stations and wireless infrastructure, especially in emerging nations. There is a great video from Ericsson on YouTube that discusses this, and that is part of a larger sequence of videos on Green Telecom. They describe using solar energy and bio-fuels in "off-grid" countries and how people who only make a few dollars a week are willing to spend some of that money to have communication services available.

But another key topic of Green is the increased demand for power management. This is not just a Telecom issue, but is important for any IT department, Operator Data Center, Central Office or co-location server farm. Power Management is where we start to see a concerted effort and overlap between Green Linux and the Telecom industry. I recently have attended two unique and separate SIG events that discussed Power Management. The Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit in April and then just last week a SCOPE-Alliance general members meeting. Power management was a key issue that is being addressed by both groups and there is definitely an overlap. Of course you would expect that considering Linux is the most widely used operating system in new Telecom network devices being designed today.

The Linux Foundation has started a Green Linux Workgroup and is working with many different projects in support of Green Linux. Green Linux, like Telecom, can mean many things but some of the most significant work is being done around ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface). Unfortunately ACPI is targeted specifically at IA (Intel Architecture) and many Telecom devices use PowerPC or MIPs, as well as Intel. But it is a good start. Especially since many core and edge devices are larger more power-hungry devices and those often do use Intel Architecture. Check out what the Linux Foundation is doing in terms of Green Linux here.

The SCOPE-Alliance has recently started a Power Management workgroup as well. The challenge for this group is to define profiles and requirements that map the high availability functionality of the Hardware Platform Interface (HPI) specification together with ACPI and IPMI. The HPI specification from the Service Availability Forum was not really written with power management in mind, but rather the management of field replaceable units (FRUs) and has always had a fairly tight coupling with IPMI. Now, with such a strong focus on power management in the industry, the SCOPE Workgroup is looking at requirements for how ACPI can fit into a hardware management profile that manages all aspects of the hardware including power. That may seem fairly straightforward, until you start to inject virtualization and the use of a hypervisor into the formula. It is not prudent to create a management model today that does not include virtualization, but it greatly increases the complexity of hardware management. Since ACPI and HPI are not integrated, and neither is designed with the concept of a hypervisor in mind, the challenge of bringing these all together is not simple. If the purpose of the hypervisor is to abstract the hardware, and management applications are typically in user space, then getting the ACPI or HPI commands around, or through, the hypervisor is something that there is no real standard for or consensus on how to do this. Or you could just put the management directly in the hypervisor, though that increases the complexity of the hypervisor, which generally should be as ‘light’ as possible.

A lot of great minds from many different companies are working on the various ACPI, HPI and hypervisor projects. But to some extent these projects are stovepiped and not looking across at each other. It is great to see an organization like SCOPE-Alliance that is trying to bridge all of these into a single profile and set of requirements that will ultimately result in a greener Telecom industry.

The Telecom Consortia Alphabet Soup

What do they all mean and how are they different…

I often get asked what is the difference between the LiMo Foundation and the Open Handset Alliance, or what is the difference between the SCOPE Alliance Carrier Grade OS and Carrier Grade Linux or the difference between SAF and OpenSAF on the infrastructure side of the business. Unless you are really close to the Telecom industry in some capacity that is directly involved with one of those organizations, it can all seem very confusing as well as a bit redundant. In actuality there is very little overlap and each organization fits a very specific role in the ecosystem. First, it is important to note that both the maturity and the objective of the consortia are quite different between the terminal (or handset) side of the business and the infrastructure side. Another key distinction is what I like to call “solutions-based” consortia and “open standards” based consortia. Almost all of the hand-set consortia getting hype in the press today are “solutions-based” consortia such as the LiMo Foundation and the Open Handset Alliance. These consortia are not focused on creating standards that drive wide interoperability. Rather their objective is to drive a specific solution to market and preferably, to gain a market advantage while doing that. And on top of that, only members of the consortia have access to the solution(s). These consortia are really more of a large business development group, each member company focused on how they can drive business through the consortia. Now, there is nothing particularly wrong with that and it is an important part of growing a nascent market, as long as you don’t confuse it with developing standards. The infrastructure part of telecom is a bit more mature, leveraging off of the wireline business that has existed for nearly a century.  The primary objective of open-standards based consortia in the infrastructure market is usually to define standards that ultimately create an even playing field for all companies in a market, whether they are members of the consortia or not. The solutions-based consortia (LiMo and OHA) create implementations or reference platforms for a specific set of software that may be open source or proprietary and is usually a combination of both.

On the other hand the standards-based consortia do not create reference platforms. In fact that is usually frowned upon. I remember the early days of the Carrier Grade Linux Workgroup when we made a reference implementation of CGL. It was rejected by the Linux community because it was not considered “open”, but rather an implementation created just to server the members of CGL. But since those early days the CGL workgroup abandoned the reference platform and only documented requirements and specifications for what a Carrier Grade Linux should be; not creating any actual implementations. Now the CGL and the Linux community enjoy a strong cooperative relationship sponsored by the Linux Foundation.

Another interesting relationship is that between SAF (Service Availability Framework) and OpenSAF. SAF is a standards-based consortium of the most pure kind. SAF only creates APIs for high-availability (HA) that can then be adopted by any company (whether they are members of SAF or not) and can be used in HA applications and operating systems. SAF APIs have widely become the standard for HA in nearly all telecommunications companies and the APIs drive interoperability between hardware and applications. The OpenSAF Foundation is an interesting consortium, as it is a mix between a solution and a standards-based consortium. OpenSAF is creating an open source implementation (e.g. solution) of SAF. OpenSAF is actually an open source project and does not define any standards or APIs themselves; instead they work very closely with the SAF consortia. The difference between OpenSAF and the handset consortia however is that OpenSAF is strictly an open source-based project and is available to any individual or company that wants do download it, unlike the handset consortia that are member-only. OpenSAF is based on a LGPL license and open standards (SAF) but it is very much a solution or implementation.

Finally there is the SCOPE Alliance, another consortia that is not really a standards-based consortium, but rather an industry advisory organization. Made up of the all the leading network equipment providers (NEPs), the SCOPE Alliance charter is to define profiles, recommendations for a Carrier Grade Base Platform and promote open standards in the Telecom market. SCOPE uses only existing open standards from CGL, SAF, ATCA and other groups to define profiles of what standards are needed for Carrier Grade platforms. In addition they are also delivering recommendations to the industry, in the form of white papers, on requirements and use cases for virtualization, power management and other key areas in Telecom.

No matter if they are solutions-based, open-standards based or a mixture of both or whether they address the terminal or the infrastructure part of Telecom; all of these consortia serve a key roll in further developing their markets. They also serve the very important function of accelerating the market and defining standards and solutions that can be used to develop commercial products long into the future.

Report from the International Telecommunications Union Conference

I’ve been in Hong Kong the last week visiting the ITU Telecom World 2006. The theme of this show, as articulated by a keynote speech from Vivian Reding, the European Union commissioner for Information Society and Media, is “Living in the Digital World”.  The fact that someone from the EU was giving the keynote at a Telecom show in Asia shows just how international this trade-show is. There are pavilions from nearly every major country, with Telecom providers from each country showing how they are bringing to their markets new Fixed Mobile Convergence services such as VoIP to cell phones.

As with any large trade-show – and this show is one of the largest – it’s a little overwhelming. There are so many vendors all trying to get their message heard above the others. There are ten halls of vendors with everything that has anything to do with telecommunications – from coaxial cable vendors with cable as big as my arm (for FTTP – Fiber-to-the-Premise) to consumer electronics. It is the latter of course that drew my attention. It was hard to escape the hype around triple play. Not just to the home or office, but to the phone itself.

One of the big messages from the major consumer vendors – Panasonic, Toshiba, OKI, NEC – was the adoption and deployment of DLNA (or Digital Living Network Alliance), a fairly new special interest group (SIG) driving the adoption of home networks. The home network is a huge market in Asia and Japan, and it is just a matter of time until it becomes hot in the U.S. as well. 

I spend a lot time tracking and participating in standards bodies and SIGs, and it appears that DLNA really got it right. DLNA consists of over 330 member companies today ranging from consumer electronics companies, PC vendors and software vendors. Consistent with the way a lot of “.orgs” are working today, the DLNA doesn’t actually create any new standards. The members are just defining use-cases around existing standards and protocols and then publishing design guidelines and test methodology around these use cases. Some example use cases are:

1. Uploading video clips from your phone onto a home media server using wireless access so they can be viewed on the television – and from any room in the house
2. Uploading music from your phone wirelessly at your friend’s house to his media server.

These are two very real scenarios for the “digital home” and achievable now.

DNLA defines three ‘components’ to its guidelines that help achieve the goals:

• DMS or Digital Media Server using http as a transfer protocol
• DMP or Digital Media Player that includes audio and video encoding
• DMC or Digital Media Controller for control functions.

One of the more interesting implementations of DLNA was demonstrated by Toshiba. Toshiba has branded something called the “High Definition Network” or HDN. I have to say this technology was pretty impressive. Beautiful crisp high definition video on screens 20 feet wide. Not the grainy display you get on most large screens. Just think what that would look like in your living room. HDN is Toshiba’s DLNA technology to deliver smooth access of Hi Def images to any room, at any time, via a wireless home network. DLNA is a real world implementation of Fixed-Mobile Convergence that will visibly affect all of us in the near future. It will enrich our every-day lives by making it easier to do the things we value most; listening to music, sharing our experiences and of course – watching television.