Tag Archives: Cloud Architecture

First Open Group Webjam — Impact of Cloud Computing on our Resumes

By E.G. Nadhan, HP

The Open Group conducted its first ever webjam within The Cloud Work Group last month. A Webjam is an informal mechanism for the members within a particular work group with a common interest to have an interactive brainstorming debate on a topic of their choice. Consider it to be a panel discussion — except everyone on the call is part of the panel! I coordinated the first webjam for The Cloud Work Group — the topic was “What will Cloud do to your resume?”

The webjam was attended by active members of the Cloud work group including

  • Sanda Morar and Som Balakrishnan from Cognizant Technologies
  • Raj Bhoopathi and E.G.Nadhan from HP.
  • Chris Harding from The Open Group

We used this post on the ECIO Forum Blog to set the context for this webjam. Click here for recording. Below is a brief summary of the key takeaways:

  • Cloud Computing is causing significant shifts that could impact the extent to which some roles exist in the future—especially the role of the CTO and the CIO. The CIO must become a cooperative integrator across a heterogeneous mix of technologies, platforms and services that are provisioned on or off the cloud.
  • Key Cloud characteristics—such as multi-tenancy, elasticity, scalability, etc.—are likely to be called out in resumes. There is an accelerated push for Cloud Architects who are supposed to ensure that aspects of the Cloud are consistently addressed across all architectural layers.
  • DevOps is expanding the role of the developer to transcend into operations. Developers’ resumes are more likely to call this experience out in Cloud Computing environments.
  • Business users are likely to call out their experience directly procuring Cloud services.
  • Application testers are more likely to address interoperability between the services provided—including the validation of the projected service levels—which could, in turn, show up on their resumes.
  • Operations personnel are likely to call out their experience with tools that can seamlessly monitor physical and virtual resources.

The recording provides much more detail.

I really enjoyed the webjam. It provided an opportunity to share the perspectives of individuals from numerous member companies of The Open Group on a topic germane to us as IT professionals as well as to The Cloud Work Group.

Are there other roles that are impacted? Are there any other changes to the content of the resumes in the future? Please listen to the recording and let me know your thoughts.

If you are a member of the Cloud Work Group, I look forward to engaging in an interesting discussion with you on other topics in this area!

A version of this blog post was originally published on HP’s Journey through Enterprise IT Services blog.

NadhanHP Distinguished Technologist and Cloud Advisor, E.G.Nadhan has more than 25 years of experience in the IT industry across the complete spectrum of selling, delivering and managing enterprise level solutions for HP customers. He is the founding co-chair for The Open Group SOCCI project, and is also the founding co-chair for the Open Group Cloud Computing Governance project. Connect with Nadhan on: Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Journey Blog.

 

Comments Off

Filed under Cloud, Cloud/SOA

Flying in the Cloud by the Seat of Our Pants

By Chris Harding, The Open Group

In the early days of aviation, when instruments were unreliable or non-existent, pilots often had to make judgments by instinct. This was known as “flying by the seat of your pants.” It was exciting, but error prone, and accidents were frequent. Today, enterprises are in that position with Cloud Computing.

Staying On Course

Flight navigation does not end with programming the flight plan. The navigator must check throughout the flight that the plane is on course.  Successful use of Cloud requires, not only an understanding of what it can do for the business, but also continuous monitoring that it is delivering value as expected. A change of service-level, for example, can have as much effect on a user enterprise as a change of wind speed on an aircraft.

The Open Group conducted a Cloud Return on Investment (ROI) survey in 2011. Then, 55 percent of those surveyed felt that Cloud ROI would be easy to evaluate and justify, although only 35 percent had mechanisms in place to do it. When we repeated the survey in 2012, we found that the proportion that thought it would be easy had gone down to 44 percent, and only 20 percent had mechanisms in place. This shows, arguably, more realism, but it certainly doesn’t show any increased tendency to monitor the value delivered by Cloud. In fact, it shows the reverse. The enterprise pilots are flying by the seats of their pants. (The full survey results are available at http://www.opengroup.org/sites/default/files/contentimages/Documents/cloud_roi_formal_report_12_19_12-1.pdf)

They Have No Instruments

It is hard to blame the pilots for this, because they really do not have the instruments. The Open Group published a book in 2011, Cloud Computing for Business, that explains how to evaluate and monitor Cloud risk and ROI, with spreadsheet examples. The spreadsheet is pretty much the state-of-the-art in Cloud ROI instrumentation.  Like a compass, it is robust and functional at a basic level, but it does not have the sophistication and accuracy of a satellite navigation system. If we want better navigation, we must have better systems.

There is scope for Enterprise Architecture tool vendors to fill this need. As the inclusion of Cloud in Enterprise Architectures becomes commonplace, and Cloud Computing metrics and their relation to ROI become better understood, it should be possible to develop the financial components of Enterprise Architecture modeling tools so that the business impact of the Cloud systems can be seen more clearly.

The Enterprise Flight Crew

But this is not just down to the architects. The architecture is translated into systems by developers, and the systems are operated by operations staff. All of these people must be involved in the procurement and configuration of Cloud services and their monitoring through the Cloud buyers’ life cycle.

Cloud is already bringing development and operations closer together. The concept of DevOps, a paradigm that stresses communication, collaboration and integration between software developers and IT operations professionals, is increasingly being adopted by enterprises that use Cloud Computing. This communication, collaboration and integration must involve – indeed must start with – enterprise architects, and it must include the establishment and monitoring of Cloud ROI models. All of these professionals must co-operate to ensure that the Cloud-enabled enterprise keeps to its financial course.

The Architect as Pilot

The TOGAF® architecture development method includes a phase (Phase G) in which the architects participate in implementation governance. The following Phase H is currently devoted to architecture change management, with the objectives of ensuring that the architecture lifecycle is maintained, the architecture governance framework is executed, and the Enterprise Architecture capability meets current requirements. Perhaps Cloud architects should also think about ensuring that the system meets its business requirements, and continues to do so throughout its operation. They can then revisit earlier phases of the architecture development cycle (always a possibility in TOGAF) if it does not.

Flying the Cloud

Cloud Computing compresses the development lifecycle, cutting the time to market of new products and the time to operation of new enterprise systems. This is a huge benefit. It implies closer integration of architecture, development and operations. But this must be supported by proper instrumentation of the financial parameters of Cloud services, so that the architecture, development and operations professionals can keep the enterprise on course.

Flying by the seat of the pants must have been a great experience for the magnificent men in the flying machines of days gone by, but no one would think of taking that risk with the lives of 500 passengers on a modern aircraft. The business managers of a modern enterprise should not have to take that risk either. We must develop standard Cloud metrics and ROI models, so that they can have instruments to measure success.

Dr. Chris Harding is Director for Interoperability and SOA at The Open Group. He has been with The Open Group for more than ten years, and is currently responsible for managing and supporting its work on interoperability, including SOA and interoperability aspects of Cloud Computing. He is a member of the BCS, the IEEE and the AEA, and is a certified TOGAF practitioner.

10 Comments

Filed under Cloud/SOA

Data Governance: A Fundamental Aspect of IT

By E.G. Nadhan, HP

In an earlier post, I had explained how you can build upon SOA governance to realize Cloud governance.  But underlying both paradigms is a fundamental aspect that we have been dealing with ever since the dawn of IT—and that’s the data itself.

In fact, IT used to be referred to as “data processing.” Despite the continuing evolution of IT through various platforms, technologies, architectures and tools, at the end of the day IT is still processing data. However, the data has taken multiple shapes and forms—both structured and unstructured. And Cloud Computing has opened up opportunities to process and store structured and unstructured data. There has been a need for data governance since the day data processing was born, and today, it’s taken on a whole new dimension.

“It’s the economy, stupid,” was a campaign slogan, coined to win a critical election in the United States in 1992. Today, the campaign slogan for governance in the land of IT should be, “It’s the data, stupid!”

Let us challenge ourselves with a few questions. Consider them the what, why, when, where, who and how of data governance.

What is data governance? It is the mechanism by which we ensure that the right corporate data is available to the right people, at the right time, in the right format, with the right context, through the right channels.

Why is data governance needed? The Cloud, social networking and user-owned devices (BYOD) have acted as catalysts, triggering an unprecedented growth in recent years. We need to control and understand the data we are dealing with in order to process it effectively and securely.

When should data governance be exercised? Well, when shouldn’t it be? Data governance kicks in at the source, where the data enters the enterprise. It continues across the information lifecycle, as data is processed and consumed to address business needs. And it is also essential when data is archived and/or purged.

Where does data governance apply? It applies to all business units and across all processes. Data governance has a critical role to play at the point of storage—the final checkpoint before it is stored as “golden” in a database. Data Governance also applies across all layers of the architecture:

  • Presentation layer where the data enters the enterprise
  • Business logic layer where the business rules are applied to the data
  • Integration layer where data is routed
  • Storage layer where data finds its home

Who does data governance apply to? It applies to all business leaders, consumers, generators and administrators of data. It is a good idea to identify stewards for the ownership of key data domains. Stewards must ensure that their data domains abide by the enterprise architectural principles.  Stewards should continuously analyze the impact of various business events to their domains.

How is data governance applied? Data governance must be exercised at the enterprise level with federated governance to individual business units and data domains. It should be proactively exercised when a new process, application, repository or interface is introduced.  Existing data is likely to be impacted.  In the absence of effective data governance, data is likely to be duplicated, either by chance or by choice.

In our data universe, “informationalization” yields valuable intelligence that enables effective decision-making and analysis. However, even having the best people, process and technology is not going to yield the desired outcomes if the underlying data is suspect.

How about you? How is the data in your enterprise? What governance measures do you have in place? I would like to know.

A version of this blog post was originally published on HP’s Journey through Enterprise IT Services blog.

NadhanHP Distinguished Technologist and Cloud Advisor, E.G.Nadhan has more than 25 years of experience in the IT industry across the complete spectrum of selling, delivering and managing enterprise level solutions for HP customers. He is the founding co-chair for The Open Group SOCCI project, and is also the founding co-chair for the Open Group Cloud Computing Governance project. Connect with Nadhan on: Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Journey Blog.

1 Comment

Filed under Cloud, Cloud/SOA

Take a Lesson from History to Integrate to the Cloud

By E.G. Nadhan, HP

In an earlier post for The Open Group Blog on the Top 5 tell-tale signs of SOA evolving to the Cloud, I had outlined the various characteristics of SOA that serve as a foundation for the cloud computing paradigm.  Steady growth of service oriented practices and the continued adoption of cloud computing across enterprises has resulted in the need for integrating out to the cloud.  When doing so, we must take a look back in time at the evolution of integration solutions starting with point-to-point solutions maturing to integration brokers and enterprise services buses over the years.  We should take a lesson from history to ensure that this time around, when integrating to the cloud, we prevent undue proliferation of point-to-point solutions across the extended enterprise.

We must exercise the same due-diligence and governance as is done for services within the enterprise. There is an increased risk of point-to-point solutions proliferating because of consumerization of IT and the ease of availability of such services to individual business units.

Thus, here are 5 steps that need to be taken to ensure a more systemic approach when integrating to cloud-based service providers.

  1. Extend your SOA strategy to the Cloud. Review your current SOA strategy and extend this to accommodate cloud based as-a-service providers.
  2. Extend Governance around Cloud Services.   Review your existing IT governance and SOA governance processes to accommodate the introduction and adoption of cloud based as-a-service providers.
  3. Identify Cloud based Integration models. It is not a one-size fits all. Therefore multiple integration models could apply to the cloud-based service provider depending upon the enterprise integration architecture. These integration models include a) point-to-point solutions, b) cloud to on-premise ESB and c) cloud based connectors that adopt a service centric approach to integrate cloud providers to enterprise applications and/or other cloud providers.
  4. Apply right models for right scenarios. Review the scenarios involved and apply the right models to the right scenarios.
  5. Sustain and evolve your services taxonomy. Provide enterprise-wide visibility to the taxonomy of services – both on-premise and those identified for integration with the cloud-based service providers. Continuously evolve these services to integrate to a rationalized set of providers who cater to the integration needs of the enterprise in the cloud.

The biggest challenge enterprises have in driving this systemic adoption of cloud-based services comes from within its business units. Multiple business units may unknowingly avail the same services from the same providers in different ways. Therefore, enterprises must ensure that such point-to-point integrations do not proliferate like they did during the era preceding integration brokers.

Enterprises should not let history repeat itself when integrating to the cloud by adopting service-oriented principles.

How about your enterprise? How are you going about doing this? What is your approach to integrating to cloud service providers?

A version of this post was originally published on HP’s Enterprise Services Blog.

HP Distinguished Technologist and Cloud Advisor, E.G.Nadhan has over 25 years of experience in the IT industry across the complete spectrum of selling, delivering and managing enterprise level solutions for HP customers. He is the founding co-chair for The Open Group SOCCI project and is also the founding co-chair for the Open Group Cloud Computing Governance project. Twitter handle @NadhanAtHP.

1 Comment

Filed under Cloud, Cloud/SOA

Secrets Behind the Rapid Growth of SOA

By E.G. Nadhan, HP

Service Oriented Architecture has been around for more than a decade and has steadily matured over the years with increasing levels of adoption. Cloud computing, a paradigm that is founded upon the fundamental service oriented principles, has fueled SOA’s adoption in recent years. ZDNet blogger Joe McKendrick calls out a survey by Companies and Markets in one of his blog posts – SOA market grew faster than expected.

Some of the statistics from this survey as referenced by McKendrick include:

  • SOA represents a total global market value of $5.518 billion, up from $3.987 billion in 2010 – or a 38% growth.
  • The SOA market in North America is set to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.5% through 2014.

So, what are the secrets of the success that SOA seems to be enjoying?  During the past decade, I can recall a few skeptics who were not so sure about SOA’s adoption and growth.  But I believe there are 5 “secrets” behind the success story of SOA that should put such skepticism to rest:

  1. Architecture. Service oriented architectures have greatly facilitated a structured approach to enterprise architecture (EA) at large. Despite debates over the scope of EA and SOA, the fact remains that service orientation is an integral part of the foundational factors considered by the enterprise architect. If anything, it has also acted as a catalyst for giving more visibility to the need for well-defined enterprise architecture to be in place for the current and desired states.
  2. Application. Service orientation has promoted standardized interfaces that have enabled the continued existence of multiple applications in an integrated, cohesive manner. Thanks to a SOA-based approach, integration mechanisms are no longer held hostage to proprietary formats and legacy platforms.
  3. Availability. Software Vendors have taken the initiative to make their functionality available through services. Think about the number of times you have heard a software vendor suggest Web services as their de-facto method for integrating to other systems? Single-click generation of a Web service is a very common feature across most of the software tools used for application development.
  4. Alignment. SOA has greatly facilitated and realized increased alignment from multiple fronts including the following:
    • Business to IT. The definition of application and technology services is really driven by the business need in the form of business services.
    • Application to Infrastructure. SOA strategies for the enterprise have gone beyond the application layer to the infrastructure, resulting in greater alignment between the application being deployed and the supporting infrastructure. Infrastructure services are an integral part of the comprehensive set of services landscape for an enterprise.
    • Platforms and technology. Interfaces between applications are much less dependent on the underlying technologies or platforms, resulting in increased alignment between various platforms and technologies. Interoperability has been taken to new levels across the extended enterprise.
  5. AdoptionSOA has served as the cornerstone for new paradigms like cloud computing. Increased adoption of SOA has also resulted in the evolution of multiple industry standards for SOA and has also led to the evolution of standards for infrastructure services to be provisioned in the cloudStandards do take time to evolve, but when they do, it is a tacit endorsement by the IT industry of the maturity of the underlying phenomenon — in this case, SOA.

Thus, the application of service oriented principles across the enterprise has increased SOA’s adoption spurred by the availability of readily exposed services across all architectural layers resulting in increased alignment between business and IT.

What about you? What factors come to your mind as SOA success secrets? Is your SOA experience in alignment with the statistics from the report McKendrick referenced? I would be interested to know.

Reposted with permission from CIO Magazine.

HP Distinguished Technologist, E.G.Nadhan has over 25 years of experience in the IT industry across the complete spectrum of selling, delivering and managing enterprise level solutions for HP customers. He is the founding co-chair for The Open Group SOCCI project and is also the founding co-chair for the Open Group Cloud Computing Governance project. Twitter handle @NadhanAtHP.

1 Comment

Filed under Cloud/SOA

Enterprise Transformation Takes the French Riviera

By The Open Group Conference Team

The Open Group Conference in Cannes, France is just around the corner. Taking place April 23-27, the conference will bring together leading minds in technology to discuss the process of Enterprise Transformation, and the role of Enterprise Architecture (EA) and IT in Enterprise Transformation.

The French Riviera is a true playground for the rich and famous. As the location of the next Open Group Conference, (not to mention the next Open Cannes Awards) it seems only fitting that we not only have an incredible venue for the event, the JW Marriott Cannes, but have our own star-studded lineup of speakers, sessions and activities that are sure to make the conference an unforgettable experience.

In addition to tutorial sessions on TOGAF and ArchiMate, the conference offers roughly 60 sessions on a varied of topics, including:

  • Enterprise Transformation, including Enterprise Architecture and SOA
  • Cybersecurity, Cloud Security and Trusted Technology for the Supply Chain
  • Cloud Computing for Business, Collaborative Cloud Frameworks and Cloud Architectures

The conference theme “Enterprise Transformation” will highlight how Enterprise Architecture can be used to truly change how companies do business and create models and architectures that help them make those changes. Keynote speakers include:

  • Dr. Alexander Osterwalder, Best-selling Author and Entrepreneur

Dr. Osterwalder is a renowned thought leader on business model design and innovation. Many executives and entrepreneurs and world-leading organizations have applied Dr. Osterwalderʼs approach to strengthen their business model and achieve a competitive advantage through business model innovation. His keynote session at the conference, titled: “Business Models, IT, and Enterprise Transformation,” will discuss how to use the Business Model Canvas approach to better align IT and business strategy, empower multi-disciplinary teams and contribute to Enterprise Transformation.

  • Herve Gouezel, Advisor to the CEO at BNP Paribas & Eric Boulay, Founder and CEO of Arismore

Keynote: “EA and Transformation: An Enterprise Issue, a New Role for the CIO?” will examine governance within the Enterprise and what steps need to take place to create a collaborative Enterprise.

  • Peter Haviland, Chief Architect and Head of Business Architecture Advisory Services at Ernst & Young, US

Keynote: “World Class EA 2012: Putting Your Architecture Team in the Middle of Enterprise Transformation,” will identify and discuss key activities leading practice architecture teams are performing to create and sustain value, to remain at the forefront of enterprise transformation.

  • Kirk Avery, Software Architect at Lockheed Martin & Robert Sweeney, MSMA Lead Systems Engineer at Naval Air Systems Command

Keynote: “FACE: Transforming the DoD Avionics Software Industry Through the Use of Open Standards,” will address the DoD Avionics Industry’s need for providing complex mission capability in less time and in an environment of shrinking government budgets

The Common Criteria Workshop and the European Commission

We are also pleased to be hosting the first Common Criteria Workshop during the Cannes Conference. This two-day event – taking place April 25 to 26 – offers a rich opportunity to hear from distinguished speakers from the Common Criteria Security community, explore viewpoints through panel discussions and work with minded people towards common goals.

One of the keynote speakers during the workshop is Andrea Servida, the Deputy Head of the Internet, Network and Information Security unit with the European Commission in Brussels, Belgium. With extensive experience defining and implementing strategies and policies on network and information security and critical information infrastructure protection, Mr. Servida is an ideal speaker as we kick-off the first workshop.

The Open Cannes Awards

What trip would be complete to Cannes without an awards ceremony? Presented by The Open Group, The Open Cannes Awards is an opportunity for our members to recognize each other’s accomplishments within The Open Group with a little fun during the gala ceremony on the night of Tuesday, April 24. The goal is to acknowledge the success stories, the hard work and dedication that members, either as individuals or as organizations, have devoted to The Open Group’s ideals and vision over the past decade.

We hope to see you in Cannes! For more information on the conference tracks or to register, please visit our conference registration page, and please stay tuned throughout the next month as we continue to release blog posts and information leading up to The Open Group Conference in Cannes, France!

Comments Off

Filed under Cloud, Cloud/SOA, Conference, Cybersecurity, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Transformation, FACE™, Semantic Interoperability, Service Oriented Architecture

Enterprise Architects and Paradigm Shifts

By Stuart Boardman, KPN

It’s interesting looking back at what people have written over the course of the year and seeing which themes appear regularly in their blogs. I thought I’d do the same with my own posts for The Open Group and see whether I could pull some of it together. I saw that the recurring themes for me have been dealing with uncertainty, the changing nature of the enterprise and the influence of information technology from outside the enterprise – and all of this in relation to the practice of enterprise architecture. I also explored the mutual influences these themes have on each other.

Unsurprisingly I’m not alone in picking up on these themes. At the risk of offending anyone I don’t mention, I note that Serge Thorn, Raghuraman Krishnamurthy and Len Fehskens have given their own perspectives on The Open Group’s Blog on some or all of these themes. And of course there’s plenty of writing on these themes going on in the blogosphere at large. In one sense I think writing about this is part of a process of trying to understand what’s going on in the world.

After some reflection, it seems to me that all of this converges in what tends to be called ”social business.” For better or worse, there is no fixed definition of the term. I would say it describes a way of working where, both within and across organizations, hierarchies and rules are being replaced by networks and collaboration. The concept of the enterprise in such a system is then definitively extended to include a whole ecosystem of customers and suppliers as well as investors and beneficiaries. Any one organization is just a part of the enterprise – a stakeholder. And of course the enterprise will look different dependent on the viewpoint of a particular stakeholder. That should be a familiar concept anyway for an enterprise architect. That one participant can be a stakeholder in multiple enterprises is not really new – it’s just something we now have no choice but to take into account.

Within any one organization, social business means that creativity and strategy development takes place at and across multiple levels. We can speak of networked, podular or fractal forms of organization. It also means a lot of other things with wider economic, social and political implications but that’s not my focus here.

Another important aspect is the relationship with newer developments in information and communication technology. We can’t separate social business from the technology which has helped it to develop and which in turn is stimulated by its existence and demands. I don’t mean any one technology and I won’t even insist on restricting it to information technology. But it’s clear that there is at least a high degree of synergy between newer IT developments and social business. In other words, the more an organization becomes a social business, the more its business will involve the use of information technology – not as a support function but as an essential part of how it does its business.  Moreover exactly this usage of IT is not and cannot be (entirely) under its own control.

A social business therefore demonstrates, in all aspects of the enterprise, fuzzy boundaries and a higher level of what I call entropy (uncertainty, rate of change, sensitivity to change). It means we need new ways of dealing with complexity, which fortunately is a topic a lot of people are looking at. It means that simplicity is not in every case a desirable goal and that, scary as it may seem, we may actually need to encourage entropy (in some places) in order to develop the agility to respond to change – effectively and without making any unnecessary long term assumptions.

So, if indeed the world is evolving to such a state, what can enterprise architects do to help their own organizations become successful social businesses (social governments – whatever)?

Enterprise Architecture is a practice that is founded in communication. To support and add value to that communication we have developed analysis methods and frameworks, which help us model what we learn and, in turn, communicate the results. Enterprise Architects work across organizations to understand how the activities of the participants relate to the strategy of the organization and how the performance of each person/group’s activities can optimally support and reinforce everyone else’s. We don’t do their work for them and don’t, if we do our work properly, have any sectional interests. We are the ultimate generalists, specialized in bringing together all those aspects, in which other people are the experts. We’re therefore ideally placed to facilitate the development of a unified vision and a complementary set of practices. OK, that sounds a bit idealistic. We know reality is never perfect but, if we don’t have ideals, we’d be hypocrites to be doing this work anyway. Pragmatism and ideals can be a positive combination.

Yes, there’s plenty of work to do to adapt our models to this new reality. Our goals, the things we try to achieve with EA will not be different. In some significant aspects, the results will be – if only because of the scope and diversity of the enterprise. We’ll certainly need to produce some good example EA artifacts to show what these results will look like. I can see an obvious impact in business architecture and in governance – most likely other areas too. But the issues faced in governance may be similar to those being tackled by The Open Group’s Cloud Governance project. And business architecture is long due for expansion outside of the single organization, so there’s synergy there as well. We can also look outside of our own community for inspiration – in the area of complexity theory, in business modeling, in material about innovation and strategy development and in economic and even political thinking about social business.

We’ll also be faced with organizational challenges. EA has for too long and too often been seen as the property of the IT department. That’s always been a problem anyway, but to face the challenges of social business, EA must avoid the slightest whiff of sectional interest and IT centrism. And, ironically, the best hope for the IT department in this scary new world may come from letting go of what it does not need to control and taking on a new role as a positive enabler of change.

There could hardly be a more appropriate time to be working on TOGAF Next. What an opportunity!

Stuart Boardman is a Senior Business Consultant with KPN where he co-leads the Enterprise Architecture practice as well as the Cloud Computing solutions group. He is co-lead of The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group’s Security for the Cloud and SOA project and a founding member of both The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group and The Open Group SOA Work Group. Stuart is the author of publications by the Information Security Platform (PvIB) in The Netherlands and of his previous employer, CGI. He is a frequent speaker at conferences on the topics of Cloud, SOA, and Identity. 

5 Comments

Filed under Business Architecture, Cloud, Cloud/SOA, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Transformation, Semantic Interoperability

Security and Cloud Computing Themes to be explored at The Open Group San Francisco Conference

By The Open Group Conference Team

Cybersecurity and Cloud Computing are two of the most pressing trends facing enterprises today. The Open Group Conference San Francisco will feature tracks on both trends where attendees can learn about the latest developments in both disciplines as well as hear practical advice for implementing both secure architectures and for moving enterprises into the Cloud.  Below are some of the highlights and featured speakers from both tracks.

Security

The San Francisco conference will provide an opportunity for practitioners to explore the theme of “hacktivism,” the use and abuse of IT to drive social change, and its potential impact on business strategy and Enterprise Transformation.  Traditionally, IT security has focused on protecting the IT infrastructure and the integrity of the data held within.  However, in a rapidly changing world where hacktivism is an enterprise’s biggest threat, how can enterprise IT security respond?

Featured speakers and panels include:

  • Steve Whitlock, Chief Security Strategist, Boeing, “Information Security in the Internet Age”
  • Jim Hietala, Vice President, Security, The Open Group, “The Open Group Security Survey Results”
  • Dave Hornford, Conexiam, and Chair, The Open Group Architecture Forum, “Overview of TOGAF® and SABSA® Integration White Paper”
  • Panel – “The Global Supply Chain: Presentation and Discussion on the Challenges of Protecting Products Against Counterfeit and Tampering”

Cloud Computing

According to Gartner, Cloud Computing is now entering the “trough of disillusionment” on its hype cycle. It is critical that organizations better understand the practical business, operational and regulatory issues associated with the implementation of Cloud Computing in order to truly maximize its potential benefits.

Featured speakers and panels include:

  • David JW Gilmour, Metaplexity Associates, “Architecting for Information Security in a Cloud Environment”
  • Chris Lockhart, Senior Enterprise Architect, UnitedHeal, “Un-Architecture: How a Fortune 25 Company Solved the Greatest IT Problem”
  • Penelope Gordon, Cloud and Business Architect, 1Plug Corporation, “Measuring the Business Performance of Cloud Products”
  • Jitendra Maan, Tata Consultancy, “Mobile Intelligence with Cloud Strategy”
  • Panel – “The Benefits, Challenges and Survey of Cloud Computing Interoperability and Portability”
    • Mark Skilton, Capgemini; Kapil Bakshi, Cisco; Jeffrey Raugh, Hewlett-Packard

Please join us in San Francisco for these speaking tracks, as well as those on our featured them of Enterprise Transformation and the role of enterprise architecture. For more information, please go to the conference homepage: http://www3.opengroup.org/sanfrancisco2012

2 Comments

Filed under Cloud, Cloud/SOA, Cybersecurity, Information security, Security Architecture, Semantic Interoperability, TOGAF

Understanding security aspects of Cloud initiatives

By Stuart Boardman, Getronics; and Omkhar Arasaratnam, IBM

The Open Group recently published a whitepaper, An Architectural View Of Security For Cloud, which is the first in a series being produced by the Security For The Cloud and SOA project. In this whitepaper we introduce a method that helps organizations to model and therefore understand the security aspects of their Cloud initiatives.

Security is still often cited as the biggest concern about the Cloud. This topic was even raised during the recent survey by The Open Group on Cloud Computing. But does the concern reflect a genuine level of risk? If so, in what way and under what circumstances? It would be irresponsible not to take this seriously, but right now we’re suffering from a “here be dragons” mentality. Despite all the good work done by The Open Group, the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and others, we still see far too much discussion of this kind: “The biggest single security threat in the Cloud is…” This helps no one, because these are generalizations and every organization’s situation is specific (This is borne out by other surveys, by the way). The result is FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) and therefore stagnation. And as people lose patience with that, the reaction is sometimes the taking of inappropriate risks.

One of the challenges in understanding Cloud-based architectures is that each party, whether it is primarily a consumer or primarily a provider, is part of an ecosystem of different entities, providing and consuming Cloud services. The view of the architecture for each player may be different but each of them must take the entire ecosystem into account and not just its own part. When you couple this with the fact that there are so many possible types of Cloud service and delivery, and so many different kinds of data one might expose in the Cloud, it’s clear that there is no one generic model for Cloud. You need to understand the particular situation you are in or can foresee being in. That can be quite complex.

The Open Group’s Security for the Cloud and SOA project is developing a security reference architecture, which will help architects and security specialists to develop their view and understanding of their situations. Using the architecture and the associated method and combining this with the advice coming from other groups such as CSA or The Open Group Jericho Forum®, you can create a comprehensible view of a complex situation, determine risks, test your solution options and set up controls to manage all this in a production situation.

The fundamentals of our approach are architectural building blocks, security principles and a scenario-driven modeling method. We have defined a set of principles but also take into account identity principles from the CSA – and in the future, will work to combine all these effectively with the recently published Jericho Foundation Identity Commandments. Policy-driven security is for us a basic principle and itself is how most other principles are supported. By using the method to model responsibility for the building blocks, you can understand how policy is managed across the ecosystem and make an informed analysis of risks, mitigations and opportunities.

In the whitepaper, we illustrate the approach for the area of identity, entitlement and access management policy. We use a scenario involving one consumer organization and three SaaS providers supporting travel booking. We look at three situations which might apply depending on the capabilities and flexibility of the various parties. Here’s an example of how responsibility for the building blocks is distributed in one of these situations and how open standards can help to support that.

This happens to be the situation which best supports the principles we highlight in the whitepaper. In other situations you can see exactly how principles are compromised. That helps an organization weigh up risks and benefits. Take a look at the whitepaper and let us know what you think. We’re happy with any input we receive. More whitepapers will follow soon extending the method to other areas of security. Later on we’ll start building realizations that will, we hope, help to promote the use of open standards and bring us closer to Boundaryless Information Flow™. We’re also running an “architectural decisions rodeo” at The Open Group Conference, Austin (July 18-22) during which we will discuss and document key architectural decisions regarding Cloud security.

Omkhar Arasaratnam is a Certified Senior Security Architect with IBM. He is a member of the IBM Security Architecture Board, the IBM Cloud Computing Security Architecture Board, and co-leads The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group’s Security for the Cloud and SOA project. He is also actively involved in the International Standards Organization (ISO) JTC1/SC38 Study Group on Cloud Computing. Omkhar is also an accomplished author and technical editor of several IBM, John Wiley & Sons, and O’Reilly publications. He also has five pending patents in the field of information technology. Omkhar has worldwide responsibility for security architecture in some of IBM’s Cloud Computing services.

Stuart Boardman is a Senior Business Consultant with Getronics Consulting where he co-leads the Enterprise Architecture practice as well as the Cloud Computing solutions group. He is co-lead with Omkhar Arasaratnam of The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group’s Security for the Cloud and SOA project and a founding member of both The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group and The Open Group SOA Work Group. Stuart is the author of publications by the Information Security Platform (PvIB) in The Netherlands and of his previous employer, CGI. He is a frequent speaker at conferences on the topics of Cloud, SOA, and Identity.

1 Comment

Filed under Cloud/SOA

SOA is not differentiating, Cloud Computing is

By Mark Skilton, Capgemini

Warning: I confess at the start of this blog that I chose a deliberately evocative title to try to get your attention and guess I did if are reading this now. Having written a couple of blogs to date with what I believed were finely honed words on current lessons learnt and futures of technology had created little reaction, so I thought I’d try the more direct approach and head directly towards a pressing matter of architectural and strategic concern.

Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) is now commonplace across all software development lifecycles and has entered the standard language of information technology design. We hear “service oriented” and “service enabled” as standard phrases handed out as common terms of reference. The point is that the processes and practices of SOA are industrial and are not differentiating, as everyone is doing these either from a design standpoint or as a business systems service approach. They enable standardization and abstraction of services in the design and build stages to align with key business and technology strategy goals, and enable technology to be developed or utilized that meets specific technical or business service requirements.

SOA practices are prerequisites to good design practice. SOA is a foundation of Service Management ITIL processes and is to be found in diverse software engineering methods from Business Process Management Systems (BPMS) to rapid Model Driven Architecture design techniques that build compose web-enabled services. SOA is seen as a key method along the journey to industrialization supporting consolidation and rationalization, as well as lean engineering techniques to optimize business and systems landscape. SOA provides good development practice in defining user requirements that provide what the user wants, and in translating these into understanding how best to build agile, decoupled and flexible architectural solutions.

My point is that these methods are now mainstream, and merely putting SOA into your proposal or as a stated capability is no longer going to be a “deal clincher” or a key “business differentiator”. The counterview I hear practitioners in SOA will say is that SOA is not just the standardized service practices but is also how the services can be identified that are differentiating. But that’s the rub. If SOA treats every requirement or design as a service problem, where is the difference?

A possible answer is in how SOA will be used. In the future and today it will be a business differentiator in the way the SOA method is used. But not all SOA methods are equal, and what will be necessary to highlight SOA method differentiation for business benefit?

Enter Cloud Computing, its origins in utility computing and the ubiquitous web services and Internet. The definitions of what is Cloud Computing, much like the early days of Service Orientation, is still evolving in understanding where the boundary and types of services it encompasses. But the big disruptive step change has been the new business model the Cloud Computing mode has introduced.

Cloud Computing has introduced automatic provisioning, self-service, automatic load balancing and scaling of resources in technology. Building on virtualization principles, it has extended into on-demand metering and billing consumption models, large-scale computing resource data centers, and large-scale distributed businesses on the web using the power of the Internet to reach and run new business models. I can hear industry observers say this is just a consequence of the timely convergence of pervasive technology network standards, the rapid falling costs per compute and storage costs and the massive “hockey stick” movement of bandwidth, smart devices and wide-scale adoption of web-based services.

But this is a step change movement from a simple realization that it’s just “another technology phase”.

Put another way: It has brought the back office computing resources and the on-demand Software as a Service Models into a dynamic new business model that changes the way business and IT work. It has “merged” physical and logical services into a new marketplace on-demand model that hitherto was “good practice“ to design as separate consumer and provider services. All that’s changed.

But does SOA fully realize these aspects of a Cloud Computing Architecture? Answer these three simple questions:

  • Does the logical service contracts define how multi-tenant environments need to work to support many concurrent services users?
  • Does SOA enable automating balancing and scaling to be considered if the initial set of declarative conditions in the service contract don’t “fit” the new operating conditions that need scaling up or down?
  • Does SOA recognize the wider marketplace and ecosystem dynamics that may result in evolving consumer/producer patterns that are dynamic and not static, driving new sourcing behaviors and usage patterns that may involve using services through a portal with no contract?

For sure, ecosystem principles are axiomatic in that they will drive standards for containers, protocols and semantics which SOA standards are perfect to adopt as boundary conditions for service contracts in a Service Portfolio. But my illustrations here are to broaden the debate as to how to engage SOA as a differentiator when it meets a “new kid on the block” like Cloud, which is rapidly morphing into new models “as we speak” extending into social networks, mobile services and location aware integration.

My real intention is to raise awareness and interest in the subjects and the activities that The Open Group is engaged in to address such topics. I sincerely hope you can follow these up as further reading and investigation with The Open Group; and of course, do feel free to comment and contact me J

Cloud Computing and SOA are key topics of discussion at The Open Group Conference, London, May 9-13, which is underway. 

Mark Skilton, Director, Capgemini, is the Co-Chair of The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group. He has been involved in advising clients and developing of strategic portfolio services in Cloud Computing and business transformation. His recent contributions include the publication of Return on Investment models on Cloud Computing widely syndicated that achieved 50,000 hits on CIO.com and in the British Computer Society 2010 Annual Review. His current activities include development of a new Cloud Computing Model standards and best practices on the subject of Cloud Computing impact on Outsourcing and Off-shoring models and contributed to the second edition of the Handbook of Global Outsourcing and Off-shoring published through his involvement with Warwick Business School UK Specialist Masters Degree Program in Information Systems Management.

3 Comments

Filed under Cloud/SOA

The Cloud, multiple Platforms within Platforms

By Mark Skilton, Capgemini

I recently attended The Open Group India Conference in March. This was the first time that The Open Group India had launched such an event, and they had the ambitious target of visiting three cities in the week. The event itself was a platform for discussion of Indian perspectives on all aspects of Architect Best Practices, and in particular, the India market on Enterprise Architecture and Cloud Computing. It drew a significant cross section of public and private industry sector professionals at all the venues, with keen debate and presentations demonstrating industry-leading thought leadership and case study.

The highly successful event raised important questions and discussion on significant topics of the moment in architecture and the Indian perspective. One that stands out in Cloud Computing was the development of Cloud Architectures and the role of Cloud as a platform for services.

Significant Cloud Computing commentary from the Cloud panel sessions included:

  • The role Indian government IT services strategy development could play in applying Cloud Computing, Grid and SOA concepts to the public sector services to the federated and regional citizenship
  • How the Indian market could exploit the SMB and youth demographic that see the Cloud as a rapid resource delivery platform, and huge potential for services in the Cloud to local and international markets
  • The evolution of Cloud services, notably in Big Data and content as a service and in applications software development in the Cloud using PaaS. Both need further focus on master data semantics and interoperability standards to help versioning, persistence of data and support of multiple Cloud virtual environments to drive the potential reality going forward

The debate of Cloud Architectures and Platforms ran throughout the three-city Conference, with notable observations and lessons learnt, including:

  • Support of multiple locations by “location-aware Clouds” was an interesting aspect when developing shared platforms that need to recognize the delivery and localization of “last mile logistics” and end-user experience of the service. One-size-fits-all needed some abstraction of end point use in enabling adoption flexibility and relevancy
  • Cloud Architectures had to be “platforms” that “evolved” like the ecosystem that made up its internal and external components and services. This was a fact as many Clouds and integration adaptor strategies using open source and proprietary technologies where driving ahead with different standards and speeds of development. Understanding the solution options needed to “design for change” was a matter of urgency in architectural design practice for Cloud
  • Mobile Cloud, including the Internet of things (IoT) and the spread of mobile channel services everywhere, drew considerable interest as a strong potential second wave of the Cloud as it enters the next stage of added-value services, virtual communities and multi-Cloud service marketplaces

The underlying theme seemed to be the emergence of service platforms and services enabled by the Cloud and its pervasiveness into social media and social networks underpinned by Cloud infrastructure and data centers. Platforms enabling other platforms in a distributed regional, wireless, global bandwidth enabled world.

I remembered that, at the same time as the Indian event, there was a shining example of technological inspiration right above our heads orbiting 200 miles around the Earth: the STS133 mission and final space flight of the Space Shuttle Discovery. This in itself was an inspiring magnificent achievement. The shuttle had flown more missions than any other — 39 in the 25-year flight history — but that was not the whole picture. Discovery was the platform that launched another platform, the Hubble Space Telescope, into the heavens. And look what discoveries came of that: the first pictures of the now-famous Eagle Nebula stellar nurseries, new insights into the distribution of galaxies and the universal constant, and the list goes on. One platform borne upon another; how much further will our children see tomorrow?

Cloud Computing will be a topic of discussion at The Open Group Conference, London, May 9-13. Join us for best practices, case studies and the future of information security, presented by preeminent thought leaders in the industry.

Mark Skilton, Director, Capgemini, is the Co-Chair of The Open Group Cloud Computing Work Group. He has been involved in advising clients and developing of strategic portfolio services in Cloud Computing and business transformation. His recent contributions include the publication of Return on Investment models on Cloud Computing widely syndicated that achieved 50,000 hits on CIO.com and in the British Computer Society 2010 Annual Review. His current activities include development of a new Cloud Computing Model standards and best practices on the subject of Cloud Computing impact on Outsourcing and Off-shoring models and contributed to the second edition of the Handbook of Global Outsourcing and Off-shoring published through his involvement with Warwick Business School UK Specialist Masters Degree Program in Information Systems Management.

1 Comment

Filed under Cloud/SOA

An SOA Unconference

By Dr. Chris Harding, The Open Group

Monday at The Open Group Conference in San Diego was a big day for Interoperability, with an Interoperability panel session, SOA and Cloud conference streams, meetings of SOA and UDEF project teams, and a joint meeting with the IEEE on next-generation UDEF. The Tuesday was quieter, with just one major interoperability-related session: the SOACamp. The pace picks up again today, with a full day of Cloud meetings, followed by a Thursday packed with members meetings on SOA, Cloud, and Semantic Interoperability.

Unconferences

The SOACamp was an unstructured meeting, based on the CloudCamp Model, for SOA practitioners and people interested in SOA to ask questions and share experiences.

CloudCamp is an unconference where early adopters of Cloud Computing technologies exchange ideas. The CloudCamp organization is responsible for these events. They are frequent and worldwide; 19 events have been held or arranged so far for the first half of 2011 in countries including Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, New Zealand, Nigeria, Spain, Turkey, and the USA. The Open Group has hosted CloudCamps at several of its Conferences, and is hosting one at its current conference in San Diego today.

What is an unconference? It is an event that follows an unscripted format in which topics are proposed and presented by volunteers, with the agenda being made up on the fly to address whatever the attendees most want to discuss. This format works very well for Cloud, and we thought we would give it a try for SOA.

The SOA Hot Topics

So what were the SOA hot topics? Volunteers gave 5-minute “lightning talks” on five issues, which were then considered as the potential agenda items for discussion:

  • Does SOA Apply to Cloud service models?
  • Vendor-neutral framework for registry/repository access to encourage object re-use
  • Fine-grained policy-based authorization for exposing data in the Cloud
  • Relation of SOA to Cloud Architecture
  • Are all Cloud architectures SOA architectures?

The greatest interest was in the last two of these, and they were taken together as a single agenda item for the whole meeting: SOA and Cloud Architecture. The third topic, fine-grained policy-based authorization for exposing data in the Cloud, was considered to be more Cloud-related than SOA-related, and it was agreed to keep it back for the CloudCamp the following day. The other two topics, SOA and Cloud service models and vendor-neutral framework for registry/repository access were considered by separate subgroups meeting in parallel.

The discussions were lively and raised several interesting points.

SOA and Cloud Architecture

Cloud is a consumption and delivery model for SOA, but Cloud and SOA services are different. All Cloud services are SOA services, but not all SOA services are Cloud services, because Cloud services have additional requirements for Quality of Service (QoS) and delivery consumption.

Cloud requires a different approach to QoS. Awareness of the run-time environment and elasticity is crucial for Cloud applications.

Cloud architectures are service-oriented, but they need additional architectural building blocks, particularly for QoS. They may be particularly likely to use a REST-ful approach, but this is still service-oriented.

A final important point is that, within a service-oriented architecture, the Cloud is transparent to the consumer. The service consumer ultimately should not care whether a service is on the Cloud.

Vendor-Neutral Framework for Registry/Repository Access

The concept of vendor-neutral access to SOA registries and repositories is good, but it requires standard data models and protocols to be effective.

The Open Group SOA ontology has proved a good basis for a modeling framework.

Common methods for vendor-neutral access could help services in the Cloud connect to multiple registries and repositories.

Does SOA Apply to Cloud service Models?

The central idea here is that the cloud service models – Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) – could be defined as services in the SOA sense, with each of them exposing capabilities through defined interfaces.

This would require standards in three key areas: metrics/QoS, brokering/subletting, and service prioritization.

Is The Open Group an appropriate forum for setting and defining Cloud customer and provider standards? It has a standards development capability. The key determining factor is the availability of member volunteers with the relevant expertise.

Are Unconferences Good for Discussing SOA?

Cloud is an emerging topic while SOA is a mature one, and this affected the nature of the discussions. The unconference format is great for enabling people to share experience in new topic areas. The participants really wanted to explore new developments rather than compare notes on SOA practice, and the result of this was that the discussion mostly focused on the relation of SOA to the Cloud. This wasn’t what we expected – but resulted in some good discussions, exposing interesting ideas.

So is the unconference format a good one for SOA discussions? Yes it is – if you don’t need to produce a particular result. Just go with the flow, and let it take you and SOA to interesting new places.

Cloud and SOA are a topic of discussion at The Open Group Conference, San Diego, which is currently underway.

Dr. Chris Harding is Director for Interoperability and SOA at The Open Group. He has been with The Open Group for more than ten years, and is currently responsible for managing and supporting its work on interoperability, including SOA and interoperability aspects of Cloud Computing. Before joining The Open Group, he was a consultant, and a designer and development manager of communications software. With a PhD in mathematical logic, he welcomes the current upsurge of interest in semantic technology, and the opportunity to apply logical theory to practical use. He has presented at Open Group and other conferences on a range of topics, and contributes articles to on-line journals. He is a member of the BCS, the IEEE, and the AOGEA, and is a certified TOGAF practitioner.

Comments Off

Filed under Cloud/SOA