Prof. Yechiam Yemini (YY) Computer Science Department Columbia University (c)Copyrights; Yechiam...

(c)Copyrights; Yechiam Yemini; 2004

Prof. Yechiam Yemini (YY)

Computer Science Department Columbia University

Lecture 4: The Power of Interoperability

Version: 1.01 1/20/04

(c)Copyrights; Yechiam Yemini; 2004 2

Large-Markets Require Interoperability

Supply-chain requires horizontal standardization C

ost

/valu

e

Time104

107

Market size

105106

108109


The PostScript/PCL Example

History (~1978-1984)PostScript: http://www.prepressure.com/ps/history/history.htm PCL: http://www.csgnetwork.com/hppclhist.html

The problem: #adptrs=(m apps)x[(n tech)x(k vndrs)]An API solution: #adptrs=(m apps) x (n tech)

API for each printer technology (e.g., printing boldface)

A language solution: #adptrs=1 per appCommon page description languages abstract printing

DisplayLaser

Word

Matrix Inkjet

Sprd Sht

Prsntn ClndrDB Editor

Line printer

Impact PressThermal


Formation of Abstractions Hourglass

Top: apps requiring common infrastructure services Bottom: infrastructures delivering common services Belt: a platform of common abstractions

Generalizes and abstracts infrastructure functionsEmpowers competitive diversity & evolution of apps &

infrastructures

Matrix

WordSprd Sht

Prsntn

ClndrDB

Editor

Display

LaserInkjet

Postscript Language

Abstractions

PrsntnClndr

DB Editor

Display

Laser Printer

Word

Matrix

Inkjet

Sprd Sht

Any Printer

Any doc creating App


Abstractions Empower Horizontal Markets

Stimulate competitive horizontal expansion Create supply chains to deliver solutions

Interoperability Hourglass

CPU

Display

Memory

Word Prcssr

StorageNIC

Sprd Sht

Prsntn

Clndr

OS

DB

File System

HW Components vendors

App vendors

Platform vendors

Any Component

Any App


CellphoneJava

Sample Hourglass Platforms

CPU

Display

Memory

Word Prcssr

StorageNIC

Sprd Sht

Prsntn

Clndr

OS

DB

File System

ATMEthrn

t

TCP

PPTDSL

SONET WDMWiFi

UDP

DNSFTPHTTP SMTP

IP

NFSSOAP

Unix, BSD, Linux…

DOS, Windows…

Palm OS…

Matrix

WordSprd Sht

Prsntn

Clndr DBEditor

Display

LaserInkjet

Postscript

Printer

AuctionWeather

News

Travel Shopping

AnyServer

Video

DisplayAudio

HTML/HTTP

Video

PDAAny

Device

Any Printer

Any Device

Any App


Formation of Backplane PlatformsThe problem: #interfaces =[(n cmpnts)x(k vndrs)]2

The fabric solution: #interfaces = 1 per component Backplane ~ bus~ fabric

HW Examples: I/O bus: abstracts I/O access (e.g., PCI) Processor bus: abstracts CPU-memory access Storage bus: abstracts drive access (e.g., SCSI, ATA…)

Floppy

Hd Drv

CacheCD drv

CPU

MemoryDisplay

Net Intrfc

Keyboard

Mouse

Bus Abstractions

Flop

py

Hd

Drv

Cach

e

CD

drv

CPU

Mem

ory

Dis

pla

yN

et

Intr

fc

Keyboar

d

Mouse

PCI


Sample SW Backplane PlatformsFile System: abstraction of access to persistent objects

Naming directoryControl plane: create/delete, mount, open/close, read/write... Data plane: stream of bytes with <cr><lf> and <EOF> tags; bit stream..

BSD sockets: abstraction of network communications Publish/subscribe: abstract asynchronous communications

File System Abstractions

Dis

pla

y

Keyboar

d

Mouse

APP1

NIC

APP2

Sto

rag

e Socket Abstractions

Peer1

Clie

nt2

Peer1

Serv

er2

Publish Subscribe

APP1

APP2

APP3

APP4

SOAP Abstractions

Clie

nt1

Clie

nt2

Serv

er

1Serv

er

2

SQL DB Abstraction

APP1

APP2

APP3

APP4


Platforms Define Market Paradigms

Provide organizing abstractions & standards Hourglass or backplane architecture

Enable interoperability & economies of scale Create efficient supply chains Stimulate competitive opportunities for components & apps

CPU

Display

Memory

Word Prcssr

StorageNIC

Sprd Sht

Prsntn

Clndr

OS

DB

File System


Dis

pla

y

Keyboard

Mouse

APP1

NIC

APP2

Sto

rage ATM

Ethrnt

TCP

PPTDSL

SONET WDMWiFi

UDP

DNSFTPHTTP SMTP

IP

NFSSOAP

SOAP Abstractions

Clie

nt1

Clie

nt2

Serv

er

1Serv

er

2


HW & SW Markets Pursue Different FociHW platforms stimulate specialization in components

Compete over cost-efficient delivery of component types Manufacturing, distribution and operations dominate

SW platforms stimulate specialization in need-segments Compete over dominance of need-segment Dominance stabilizes competitive threat of platform & app providers

CPU

Display

Memory

Word Prcssr

StorageNIC

Sprd Sht

Prsntn

Clndr

OS

DB

File System

HW vendors specialize in component-segments

App vendors specialize in need-segments


SW: Platform vs. App Providers

SW economics are substantially different from HW Fixed production costs Competitive barriers: initially very low, later very high

App and platform vendors are mutually threatenedApp vendor wants platform independence creates private platformPlatform vendor wants to gain share of app $ value create apps

Problem is best solved through open platformsOpen platforms create competitive level field (e.g., PDF,Linux, Web, Java, J2EE..) Level fields still need leaders (e.g., Cisco IETF, SUN/NFS/Java…)

Platforms stimulate segment consolidationCreate economies of scale in need-segments (e.g., office suites, CAD suites,

ERM suites, CRM suites, security suites…)


The Rise of Network Interoperability

HW • VLSI (low cost CPU, Mem)

SW • File-centric OS; GUI• Desktop apps

Net • PC to file-server LAN

App • Desktop computing

Mrkt • SMB, SOHO, consumers

TCO • $103 per year

Max connectivity

Ethernet

Token Ring

FDDI

Directory

SDH

NetwareIPX

Mail

Interoperability: Single stack islands

Decnet Stack

SNA Stack

OSI StackAppletalk

Banyan

Novell


Interoperability: Bridging

Bridge – translate between two representations Link-layer bridge: translate packet headers &

transmission App-layer bridge wrapper

Scaling for diversity (handling n components)Bridge: O(n2) adapters, one for each pair of media

Ethernet Token Ring

Bridge Bridge

FDDISNA StackOSI Stack

Bridge


Router vs. Bridge: 1990

Both provide LAN interconnection & routing Both provide interoperability

Bridge: via conversion among interfacesRouter: via tunneling

Router involved unclear value propositionMuch higher HW costs; complexityLower performance; interoperability support

The leading LAN companies pursued bridging

Ethernet

Token Ring

FDDI

Directory

SDH

NetwareIPX

Mail

Decnet Stack

SNA Stack

OSI StackAppletalk

Banyan

ATM Stack


Ethrnt

TCP

HTTP

Bridge vs. Router Hourglass : 1995

It was bridge vs. hourglass not bridge vs. router Most stacks were eliminated by the IP hourglassBridges vanished into Ethernet switchesThe LAN market consolidated; key players vanished

ATMPPTDSL

SONETWDM

WiFi

UDP

DNSFTP

SMTP

IP

NFS

Protocol Abstractions

SOAP


The Transformations of The File System


Dis

pla

y

Keyboar

d

Mouse

APP1

NIC

APP2

Sto

rag

e

Ethernet

Token Ring

FDDI

Directory

SDH

NetwareIPX

Mail File Server Abstractions

Clie

nt1

Clie

nt2

Clie

nt3

Serv

er

Repository AbstractionsC

lient

Serv

er1

Serv

er2

Serv

er3

Unify apps accessto persistent resources

Unify apps access to persistent local

resources

Unify apps access to persistent global resources

WEB

Netware, NFS


Principle 3: Interoperability Requires Platforms Platforms define technology/market paradigms

Provide common abstractions to compose solutions API, language or protocol abstractions; Hourglass or backplane

Mass markets organize around platforms Define segments, positions and supply chains

Technology leaders deliver the abstractionsE.g., DEC; MS; Intel; Novell; SUN; CISCO…

Platforms define foci for specializationHW vendors focus on dominating component-segmentSW vendors focus on dominating need-segment

HW vendors: dominate component-segments

App vendors: dominate need-segments


Pursuing A Platform Opportunity

Identify new growing interoperability need Growing market Diversifying app needs and components supply Novel abstractions needed

Identify the hourglass structure and participants Design initial platform

Occam’s design: minimally sufficient abstractions Design for extensibility

Pursue partnership to capture market Open platform is best; but needs a solid business model


Example: Bioinformatics Industry

Market: users who need bioinformatics services Researchers; pharmaceuticals; health-care…

Diversification: growing range of databases + apps Databases: genomics, proteomics, experiments… App tools: analysis; statistical search/classify…

Novel interoperability needs How is this different from SQL databases and apps? What new abstractions are needed?

Platform: ?common repository language??Build on Digital Library Repositories (e.g., Fedora)??Next generation content-scalable distributed file system?


Example: Personal Storage (PS)Market: users with 40GB cell-phone/PDA (?and 5TB DVR?)Diversification:

PS could deliver any app/content better than client-serverLots of cell-phone/PDA HW providers

Novel interoperability needDistribute massive diversified content and apps to PSSynchronize PS with PC/notebook/servers storage

Platform: ?CDN protocol? ?Distributed mobile file system?

Unleash our Digivorous appetite:

zero-access-time to any-service/content

anytime, anywhere using any-client

Prof. Yechiam Yemini (YY) Computer Science Department Columbia University (c)Copyrights; Yechiam...

Documents

Transcript of Prof. Yechiam Yemini (YY) Computer Science Department Columbia University (c)Copyrights; Yechiam...