Re: Cloud Storage: A New Implementation Style?

On 19 October 2014 12:40, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Anders,
>
> You should probably read the pdf.
>
> The conclusion reads,
>
> "There is a meaningful opportunity to refactor the RWW Social-Web
> Cloud-Storage Platforms into an open-source services platform that is
> capable of applying the same techniques, for network services, in a manner
> that does not simply service the needs of network providers but also -
> end-users.  To do this, it would be best if a decentralised, cooperative
> framework of collaborators could work together, with transparency."
>

What is meant by "network services"?


>
> Timh.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On 19 Oct 2014, at 9:18 pm, Anders Rundgren <
> anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2014-10-19 09:41, Timothy Holborn wrote:
> > Tim,
> >
> > If this was a description of an innovation, I didn't got it :-(
> > I think you need a "now" and "then" illustration for us hands-on guys :-)
> >
> > related:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_pitch
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Anders
> >
> >
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I'm working on a project that requires large volumes of video being
> delivered.  I've considered the capabilities of RWW.io (Cloud Storage) and
> pondered about a new style of implementation.
> >>
> >> I've attached a PDF: and am seeking feedback (hopefully also,
> collaboration).
> >>
> >> I like the idea of building out this solution under my 'web civics'
> flag; and felt the first step, was to check whether i'm talking about
> something that people had already been planning to deploy - or is this
> something new?
> >>
> >> Without the funds to consider going about this commercially; and beyond
> that, feeling that perhaps to start a project like this on the same
> grounds; nor, understanding whether or not it is an innovative concept of
> RWW, etc.
> >>
> >> Well,
> >>
> >> I figured i'd post.  Sorry for the wrong email. I look forward to
> feedback.
> >>
> >> Below is a TXT output (which looses some of the formatting).  I've
> attached the PDF, and the Google Drive link is:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2dkRNc0xNSVRDTFk/view?usp=sharing
> >> _____________________________________________________________
> >>
> >> *RWW: World Wide Web Network Services Infrastructure*
> >> Decentralised Cloud Storage, Content Distribution, and Knowledge
> Economics
> >> Overview
> >>     Rich Media Distribution accounts for a significant portion of
> Internet.  These systems transport rich media in a variety of formats,
> encapsulated as media files or other formats, as to enable distribution
> across the web.  In the SandVine report for the first half of 2014, The
> Peak Period Traffic Composition of Internet use in North America shows
> significant percentages of Real-Time Entertainment, File-sharing and other
> activities both upstream and downstream accounting for Peak-Period internet
> Use in the Region.  These statistics are then backed-up by the same report,
> outlining the share of web-traffic accounted for by Bit-Torrent and an
> array of popular Internet Media Services.
> >> These statistics show the relatively high demand or use or Internet for
> Media.
> >> Web 2.0 furthered internet website technology to provide an array of
> enhancements made possible by scripting and RDBMS Connectivity.  These
> systems were first used for mainframe, workstation and local area
> networking.  As Web 2.0 systems developed, these technologies were then
> applied to create ‘web applications’ used on the World Wide Web.  In the
> Late 1990’s, Tim Berners-Lee and others, started reinventing these systems.
> This course produced the ‘Semantic Web’ concept. Incorporating a new type
> of database methodology, embedded within the concept of Linked-Data.
> Considerations surrounding the application of these technologies have been
> examined for over a decade for an array of applications, including
> cloud-storage for the social-web.  A recent PHD Thesis by Andrei Sambra,
> under the direction of Tim Berners-Lee, examines data Ownership and
> Interoperability for a Decentralised Social Semantic Web.  This paper
> outlines considerations relating to Privacy, Access Control a
> > nd
> >> decentralised storage as is exampled by the works produced in relation
> to the thesis rww.io <http://rww.io>.
> >> Rww.io is an example of a linked-data platform.  The system is designed
> to authenticate a user (person / machine) using an X.509v3 Certificate
> (WebID-TLS) which in-turn authorises access to materials stored on that
> server.
> >> The Server itself is an open-source implementation, which can support a
> multitude of users and applied business systems.  The server implementation
> incorporates the use of SPARQL, JSON-LD, RDF and an array of read/write web
> functions (DAV, AJAX, JSONP, CORS).
> >> Existing Research and Development has very much focused on
> user-interaction with these systems as a means to support decentralisation
> of user-data, from traditional Web 2.0 application, user-experiences.
> These new-forms of ‘cloud storage’ models support the development of
> applications whereby the application provider does not store user-data, but
> rather references the user-data-storage location.
> >> The Era of Web 3.0 Technology has been contemplated by Jeff Sayre in
> his paper “Web 3.0: Powering Startups to Become Smartups”.  As noted by
> Jeff in this paper, the term “smart-ups” was originally coined by Kingsley
> Idehen.
> >> Web 3.0 denotes the use of Semantic Web Technology; where structured
> data is used within web-documents to make declarations of meaning for
> information entered into web-documents, in such a way that the web itself
> becomes a database.
> >> The culmination of these concepts have traditionally been considered in
> terms of the ‘social web’.  Indeed, Tim Berners-Lee’s Paper “Socially Aware
> Cloud Storage” documents the concept of “social network silos” which when
> combined with Read-Write Linked-Data created an established way of thinking
> surrounding the use of Read-Write Web Cloud Storage Platforms, extending
> the standards documentation to the creation of “Linked Data Platform” from
> an initial standpoint of considerations surrounding the Social Web.
> >>
> >> Content Distribution Services
> >>     Content Distribution Services or “CDN’s” have traditionally
> involved a syndicated system of servers and software, created to distribute
> content in large volumes across the web to a plurality of users. The Basic
> Concept of a CDN is that it transports web-resources from a point of
> origin, through a distribution framework, that then enables end-users to
> access those resources from a location that is local to that user.  This
> has the Network Effect of distributing requests across a multitude of
> server-locations whilst facilitating access to particular resources by
> particular users from nodes within this distribution service, that are most
> effective for that user to access.
> >> A Simple example would be that if an Australian User utilised a
> resource from an American Website, that resource may be forwarded by the
> CDN to an Australian location, so that when the Australian User sought to
> use that resource - the data-transfer between the Australian User and the
> resource would be facilitated via national networks.
> >>
> >> RWW / LDP - Innovation Summary
> >>     The Principle concept is to apply RWW Cloud Server Technology for
> the purpose of CDN Deployment.  This in-effect has the capacity to create a
> virtualised ‘web-storage’ platform whereby authenticated users can store
> data on the cloud, in a decentralised manner using Access Control whilst
> optimising the Web for Content Services.
> >> Background
> >>     After many years working on Video On Demand Systems, a current
> project required investigation into the delivery of a Hybrid TV Platform,
> incorporating IPTV capabilities.  These types of systems have very high
> throughput and data requirements.  To facilitate these technical
> requirements infrastructure is deployed throughout the Internet Network, at
> scale, often including to Local Nodes such as DSLAM Locations as to
> facilitate high-throughput for connected subscribers incorporating QOS
> capabilities in relation to the delivery of a Infrastructure Grade
> Service.   These systems have in-turn required operators to build and
> manage this sophisticated Infrastructure.
> >> Proposal
> >>     Internet Service Providers (“ISP” / “ISP’s”) have engaged these
> network service providers in an array of ways, including through the
> provision of Rack-Space, Power and Connectivity to CDN providers, who
> in-turn manage the content services platform.  This business model often
> results in difficulties due to the ISP Infrastructure Managers (ISP’s)
> providing the Infrastructure service to the CDN service provider, who
> in-turn manages the maintenance requirements of the CDN Equipment.
> >> I then considered that perhaps, rather than acquiring and deploying
> this infrastructure solution for deployment into ISP Networking
> Infrastructure, Perhaps it is possible to refactor the use-case around RWW
> Cloud Storage Platforms as to provide this software platform to ISP’s who
> can then, in-turn, internally manage the CDN Infrastructure.  Further
> considering the  opportunity, i then realised that whilst the initial
> business case for exploring this technical design / business opportunity
> was to lower the effective cost for Media Service Providers (“MSP’s”) in
> deploying infrastructure grade service - the methodology is not exclusively
> tied to the service provision of any one particular ‘vendor’, but rather, a
> cloud-services platform that is capable of virtualising the web from its
> existing state of ‘silos’ to ‘smart storage’.
> >> In one embodiment; the software embodiment is installed from an
> open-source package.  This software allows a service-operator to prioritise
> the content stored on the network subject to the network load relating to
> the usage of assets over internet connected networks.  In this way, “Web
> 3.0” software (including media files, as an example) can be cached on the
> network to the local node based on usage, or other prioritisation factors
> managed by the network provider.
> >> FileSystem storage may include;
> >> Personal Files: for example, a user who works on the web from home, may
> utilises a specific exchange the majority of the time.  Therein, the
> ability to store data at that exchange (rather than providing transit to an
> alternative peer) may increase performance whilst lowering cost for that
> users cloud storage Requirements.
> >> IPTV; An IPTV network is defined as an Internet Video Service that
> incorporates Quality of Service (QOS) Requirements, as to ensure the
> network performance is appropriately managed; in a way, for example, that
> ensures availability and managed buffering for usage of a qualified
> service.  In this way, the services-platform may be provided by the ISP as
> to support enhanced services in a manner that was otherwise either
> unobtainable or more costly.
> >> Economically, ISP’s often manage their own infrastructure.  It becomes
> expensive to engage external providers to manage what is arguably a
> practical requirement of ISP infrastructure.  Expense drivers include
> network design, available co-location or rack-space (inclusive of power,
> etc.) in any specific environment (ie: inclusive of telecommunications
> exchanges) which may or may not have resources available to best cater for
> all network opportunities, as driven by a customer base.
> >> By offering an open-source system that is capable of providing Access
> Control upon the Content Services Layer, rather than the equipment layer,
> it may be possible to create an abstraction between tele housing data for
> the purpose of network engineering and use-case fulfilment and the
> ownership of the content tele housed within said environment.
> >> The Web is a Peer-to-Peer based system.  Initial transit models over
> Internet Protocol facilitated the ‘peer-to-peer’ networking capability via
> mapping addresses, in-turn creating a carriage service, without
> inter-mediatory storage.  As the Internet exponentially grew, utility
> problems emerged through the lack of bandwidth between points (ie:
> international carriage) as required for every request from one
> source-point, to another; related, was the issue of centralised resourcing
> and the ability for a system to facilitate access simultaneously to more
> individual requests than any single computing device was capable of
> servicing alone.
> >> In the initial stages of developing solutions for this problem, systems
> called ‘cache servers’ were implemented, which created rule-sets, allowing
> content to be stored in a location closer to any requesting entity; which
> in-turn reduced the requirement for accessing content from an original
> source location.
> >> As Web 2.0 solutions emerged, furthering online use of rich-media and
> database driven web-systems, more advanced, yet privately managed systems
> were further developed; these systems were called “Content Distribution
> Networks” or ‘CDN’s’.
> >> CDN’s changed the way websites were able to manage the distribution of
> their content, with the interest of controlling use of that content within
> their own systems or ‘web portals’ as a medium of intellectual property
> management, offering enhancements to quality of service without the need to
> deploy and manage hardware infrastructure throughout the region of use.
> The other effect surrounding the business model of a CDN was that rather
> than the ISP managing their own cache systems (as required prior to the
> advent of CDN’s) which cost the ISP funds, in exchange for network
> optimisation benefits; the CDN Businesses PAID the ISP’s to manage new,
> more sophisticated means of managing this content networking issue on the
> behalf of websites, rather than ISPs.
> >>  CDN’s and related infrastructure are still fundamentally based upon
> the use of centralised relational database systems.  Inbuilt into the
> design, are factors relating to the architecture of these relational
> database technology which are different to the traits of graph database
> technology; across many levels, including that of security.
> >> Within the sphere of RDF, RWW, TURTLE, WebID-TLS, and JSON-LD based
> decentralised web-technologies, new paradigms have been developed where the
> principle focus technically, has been formatted to consider economics and
> the social-web.  Problematically, these infrastructure solutions, that have
> much greater capacities to offer communities or individual entities a new
> means to manage data-rights, have suffered from a lack of deployment
> solutions, regardless of the benefits made available to developers should
> these systems become more easily usable by a sufficiently resource critical
> mass of users who in-turn are made capable of better controlling their own
> data; even where their influence of control, is to provide constituents or
> embodiments of their information uniformly or freely.
> >> These technologies can make distinctions between a reference to a
> persons data, and a contribution of a person or entity; or embodiment
> through accumulative configuration and presentation, of a plurality of
> contributors concepts; into a unique format, that may be its own
> embodiment, as distinct from each and every constituent, without prejudice.
> >> By adapting the before mentioned technologies, into a networking
> platform made available to infrastructure operators (such as ISP’s and
> Data-centre locations), the capacity to further virtualise ‘cloud storage’
> has distinct opportunities to provide remedy and/or opportunity, to a
> variety of problems (on a variety of levels); including but not exclusive
> to, initial platform frameworks required for the emerging
> ‘knowledge-economy’, establishing capacities for such systems to develop,
> with discourse through socio-economic frameworks, as a predicate to further
> application innovation, utility and related economic growth / resourcing
> measures.
> >> Economic factors are an important manifest function of human sociology,
> or perhaps more succinctly - how the world works.  Web-Payments and
> Credentials W3 Community Groups  are actively working on systems capable of
> servicing economic solutions surrounding the application of these types of
> ‘cloud storage’ platforms, in the manner described by this paper.
> >>
> >> Conclusion
> >>     There is a meaningful opportunity to refactor the RWW Social-Web
> Cloud-Storage Platforms into an open-source services platform that is
> capable of applying the same techniques, for network services, in a manner
> that does not simply service the needs of network providers but also -
> end-users.  To do this, it would be best if a decentralised, cooperative
> framework of collaborators could work together, with transparency.
> https://www.sandvine.com/downloads/general/global-internet-phenomena/2014/1h-2014-global-internet-phenomena-report.pdf
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scripting_language
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database_management_system
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_application
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web
> >>  http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html
> >>  http://myprofile-project.org/thesis/manuscript_en.pdf
> >>  http://rww.io/
> >>  http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/tls/
> >>  http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/
> >> 
> http://jeffsayre.com/2010/09/13/web-3-0-powering-startups-to-become-smartups/
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_web
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html
> >>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/ReadWriteLinkedData.html
> >>  http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_cache
> >>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_delivery_network
> >> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/2014Jul/0043.html
> >>  https://web-payments.org/
> >>  http://opencreds.org/
> >>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/
> >>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/
> >
>
>