Paul

Do you agree that mesh is helpful, but otherwise neither necessary nor sufficient?

A

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018, 18:05 Paul Fremantle, <paul@...> wrote:

I think the overall definition is much better. 

I really like how service meshes enable DRY and declarative intent, but there are lots of other important technologies (such as network attached storage, software defined firewalls, message brokers, etc) that also might been seen as important to successful cloud native architectures. All the other elements of your list seem to be about approaches not mechanisms, hence the service mesh line therefore seems to be a different category.

Paul

On 30 January 2018 at 17:48, alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Nice one Brian

Once you said "cloud native is automation"

Re the second section, I suggest "promote... but are not necessary for".  In particular i am not convinced immutability is quite "right", and service mesh is overkill for many use cases 

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018, 17:30 Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io, <briangrant=google.com@lists.cncf.io> wrote:

The CNCF Charter contains a definition of "Cloud Native" that was very Kubernetes-focused. This definition proved to be inadequate during a number of recent discussions, particularly those around "cloud-native storage" in the Storage WG. I would like to update the definition. My first attempt follows. 

Existing charter text:

The Foundation’s mission is to create and drive the adoption of a new computing paradigm that is optimized for modern distributed systems environments capable of scaling to tens of thousands of self healing multi-tenant nodes.

Cloud native systems will have the following properties:

(a) Container packaged. Running applications and processes in software containers as an isolated unit of application deployment, and as a mechanism to achieve high levels of resource isolation. Improves overall developer experience, fosters code and component reuse and simplify operations for cloud native applications.

(b) Dynamically managed. Actively scheduled and actively managed by a central orchestrating process. Radically improve machine efficiency and resource utilization while reducing the cost associated with maintenance and operations.

(c) Micro-services oriented. Loosely coupled with dependencies explicitly described (e.g. through service endpoints). Significantly increase the overall agility and maintainability of applications. The foundation will shape the evolution of the technology to advance the state of the art for application management, and to make the technology ubiquitous and easily available through reliable interfaces.

Proposed text:

The Foundation’s mission is to create and drive the adoption of a new computing paradigm, dubbed Cloud-Native computing, designed to facilitate a high velocity of change to applications, services, and infrastructure at scale in modern distributed-systems environments such as public clouds and private datacenters, while providing high degrees of security, reliability, and availability. To that end, the Foundation seeks to shape the evolution of the technology to advance the state of the art for application management and to foster an ecosystem of Cloud-Native technologies that are interoperable through well defined interfaces, and which are portable, vendor-neutral, and ubiquitous.

The following are some attributes of Cloud Native:

• Cloud-native services should enable self-service. For instance, cloud-native resources should be self-provisioned from an elastic pool that for typical, on-demand usage appears to be of unlimited capacity.

• Cloud-native environments are dynamic. They necessitate self-healing and adaptability of applications and services running in such environments.

• Cloud-native applications, services, and infrastructure facilitate high-velocity management at scale via continuous automation, which is enabled by externalizing control, supporting dynamic configuration, and providing observability. In particular, resource usage is measured to enable optimal and efficient use.

• Cloud-native services and infrastructure are decoupled from applications, with seamless and transparent consumption experiences.

Non-exhaustive, non-exclusive examples of mechanisms and approaches that promote Cloud-Native approaches include:

• Immutable infrastructure: Replace individual components and resources rather than updating them in place, which rejuvenates the components/resources, mitigates configuration drift, and facilitates repeatability with predictability, which is essential for high-velocity operations at scale.

• Application containers: Running applications and processes in containers as units of application deployment isolates them from their operational environments as well as from each other, facilitates higher levels of resource isolation, fosters component reuse, enables portability, increases observability, and standardizes lifecycle management.

• Microservices: Loosely coupled microservices significantly increase the overall agility and maintainability of applications, particularly for larger organizations.

• Service meshes: Service meshes decouple service access from the provider topology, which reduces the risk of operational changes, and support inter-component observability.

• Declarative configuration: Intent-oriented configuration lets users focus on the What rather than the How, and reserves latitude for automated systems achieve the desired state.

• Event-driven execution: Enables agile, reactive automated processes, and facilitates systems integration.

As new Cloud-Native techniques and technologies emerge, they will be incorporated into the Foundation’s portfolio of recommended practices, approaches, and projects.