This disclosure relates generally to communications systems, more particularly, to providing network resources in a hybrid cloud environment.
Data centers include a complex network of hardware and software that form “clouds”, which may host applications and store large amounts of data for an organization or multiple organizations. An enterprise data center, for example, may be privately owned and discretely provides services for a number of its customers, with each customer using data center resources by way of private networks. Operatively, enterprise data centers provide dynamic “virtual networks” that support server and desktop virtualization. When an enterprise data center runs out of capacity (e.g., storage computing resources, etc.), an enterprise service provider may opt to add more hardware, which results in a direct and permanent increase in data center hardware and/or operational costs. As another option, the enterprise service provider may contract or lease additional computing resources from a public cloud data center, which only temporarily increases hardware and/or operational costs during a lease period. This contract or lease offers numerous advantages and provides a flexible cost structure over simply adding more hardware.
When an enterprise data center shares or leases computing resources from another data center (e.g., such as a public cloud data center), the resultant combination of computing resources is referred to as a “hybrid” cloud. A hybrid cloud generally includes a cloud infrastructure composed of two or more clouds that inter-operate or federate through technology. In essence, a hybrid cloud represents an interaction between private and public clouds where a private cloud joins a public cloud and utilizes public cloud resources in a secure and scalable way. Typically, in a hybrid cloud environment, respective data center resources are shared using an overlay network. Despite numerous advantages offered by hybrid cloud environments, contracting, leasing, coordinating, or otherwise securing additional resources from a public cloud often proves an onerous and complex task.
The embodiments herein may be better understood by referring to the following description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which like reference numerals indicate identical or functionally similar elements. Understanding that these drawings depict only exemplary embodiments of the disclosure and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the principles herein are described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which:
Overview
According to one or more embodiments of the disclosure, a cloud broker gateway orchestrates and coordinates securing cloud resources in a hybrid cloud environment—e.g., between a private cloud (e.g., enterprise network) and a public cloud (e.g., third party cloud network provider). Specifically, the cloud broker gateway interfaces with the enterprise network and one or more public clouds, including a first public cloud and a second public cloud. The cloud broker gateway receives a request for one or more computing resources from a tenant associated with the enterprise network, and directs the request to the first public cloud based on a brokerage policy for the tenant. The cloud broker gateway receives a response indicating the first public cloud cannot provide the one or more computing resources, and redirects the request to the second public cloud based on the brokerage policy for the tenant. The cloud broker gateway also establishes a hybrid cloud that provides access to the one or more computing resources between the second public cloud and the enterprise network.
Description
Various embodiments of the disclosure are discussed in detail below. While specific implementations are discussed, it should be understood that this is done for illustration purposes only. A person skilled in the relevant art will recognize that other components and configurations may be used without parting from the spirit and scope of the disclosure.
As used herein the term “cloud”, “cloud network”, “public network”, including combinations thereof, generally refers to communication networks that are visible and accessible to other devices (and/or users) that reside outside such communication networks. Moreover, for purposes of discussion herein, operations performed by a cloud, a cloud network, and/or a public network generally refer to hardware and/or software such as cloud platforms, application program interfaces (APIs), virtual machines (VMs), hypervisors, switches, routers, and the like, which are hosted by such cloud, cloud network, and/or public network, as is appreciated by those skilled in the art.
A communication network is a geographically distributed collection of nodes interconnected by communication links and segments for transporting data between end nodes, such as personal computers and workstations, or other devices, such as sensors, etc. Many types of networks are available, ranging from local area networks (LANs) to wide area networks (WANs). LANs typically connect these nodes over dedicated private communications links located in the same general physical location, such as a building or campus. WANs, on the other hand, typically connect geographically dispersed nodes over long-distance communications links, such as common carrier telephone lines, optical lightpaths, synchronous optical networks (SONET), synchronous digital hierarchy (SDH) links, etc.
Cloud computing can be generally defined as Internet-based computing in which computing resources are dynamically provisioned and allocated to client or user computers or other devices on-demand from a collection of resources available via the network (e.g., “the cloud”).Cloud computing resources, for example, can include any type of resource such as computing, storage, and network devices, virtual machines (VMs), etc. For instance, resources may include service devices (firewalls, deep packet inspectors, traffic monitors, etc.), processing devices (brute force processing capability), storage devices (e.g., servers, network attached storages, storage area network devices), etc., and may be used for instantiation of VMs, databases, applications (Apps), etc.
As noted above, a “hybrid cloud” is a cloud network infrastructure composed of two or more cloud networks that inter-operate or federate through technology. Operatively, in a hybrid cloud environment, a private cloud network joins a public cloud network and uses public cloud network resources in a secure and scalable way. In this hybrid cloud environment, many applications remain within corporate or enterprise datacenters, however, certain applications having, for example, dynamic computing requirements, may be migrated over to the public cloud network to use the public cloud network resources. For these certain applications, challenges arise from the complex nature of leasing, coordinating, or otherwise securing the additional infrastructure in the public cloud.
As shown, the various clouds or networks include nodes/devices 106 (e.g., routers, switches, servers, and the like) interconnected by communication links 108. Communication links 108 may be wired links or shared media (e.g., wireless links, etc.) where certain devices may be in communication with other nodes/devices based on, for example, distance, signal strength, network/node topology, current operational status, location, etc. Data packets 140 (e.g., traffic and/or messages) may be exchanged among the nodes/devices 106 in hybrid cloud environment 100 using predefined network communication protocols as will be understood by those skilled in the art. Those skilled in the art will also understand that any number of computing resources, devices, links, etc. may be used in hybrid cloud environment 100, and that the view shown herein is for simplicity.
As shown, the networks in hybrid cloud environment 100, employ respective cloud gateways—here, private cloud network 105 employs an enterprise gateway 125 which communicates with a cloud gateway 130 in public cloud network 110 and/or a cloud gateway 135 in public cloud network 115. The respective gateways are shown for purposes of illustration, not limitation. It is appreciated that those skilled in the art will understand the gateways represent of hardware and software that operatively interconnect computing resources and orchestrate communications between private cloud network 105 and public cloud(s) 110, 115. Details regarding these and other features of the gateways are described in, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,203,784 and 8,856,339, which are incorporated herein by reference to their entirety. For example, enterprise gateway 125 may include Virtual Ethernet Modules (VEMs), virtual machines (VMs), switches, distributed virtual switches (DVS), and other hardware/software that operates to establish, manage, and secure tunnels for communications between public and private clouds. Cloud gateways 130, 135 (for respective public clouds 110, 115), similar to enterprise gateway 125, may also include virtual machines (VMs), switches, distributed virtual switches (DVS), and other hardware/software that communicates with private cloud network 105 over respective secure tunnels. Operatively, the gateways (including underlying hardware/software) form an inter-cloud fabric (e.g., an overlay network) that extends enterprise infrastructures, storage capability, computing resources, and the like, to one or more public clouds in order to meet enterprise resource needs. In some embodiments, for example, cloud gateways 130, 135 can employ cloud VEMs (cVEMS) for switching inter-VM traffic between private cloud network 105 and private application VMs (e.g., contained in the public clouds). In these embodiments, the private application VMs (which may include nested VM containers) can execute in public clouds 110, 115 while running private cloud applications.
It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that other processor and memory types, including various computer-readable media, may be used to store and execute program instructions pertaining to the techniques described herein. Also, while the description illustrates various processes, it is expressly contemplated that various processes may be embodied as modules configured to operate in accordance with the techniques herein (e.g., according to the functionality of a similar process). Further, while the processes have been shown separately, those skilled in the art will appreciate that processes may be routines or modules within other processes. For example, processor 220 can include one or more programmable processors, e.g., microprocessors or microcontrollers, or fixed-logic processors. In the case of a programmable processor, any associated memory, e.g., memory 240, may be any type of tangible processor readable memory, e.g., random access, read-only, etc., that is encoded with or stores instructions that can implement program modules, e.g., a module having cloud broker process 244 and/or cloud adapter process 248 encoded thereon. Processor 220 can also include a fixed-logic processing device, such as an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or a digital signal processor that is configured with firmware comprised of instructions or logic that can cause the processor to perform the functions described herein. Thus, program modules may be encoded in one or more tangible computer readable storage media for execution, such as with fixed logic or programmable logic, e.g., software/computer instructions executed by a processor, and any processor may be a programmable processor, programmable digital logic, e.g., field programmable gate array, or an ASIC that comprises fixed digital logic, or a combination thereof. In general, any process logic may be embodied in a processor or computer readable medium that is encoded with instructions for execution by the processor that, when executed by the processor, are operable to cause the processor to perform the functions described herein.
As noted above, certain challenges arise when creating a hybrid cloud environment. For example, dynamic and changing tenant requirements (e.g., on-demand) may complicate coordinating and securing public cloud network infrastructure and computing resources. Further, certain computing resources may be more appropriate from one cloud provider over another cloud provider, based on, for example, an availability of cloud resources, bandwidth, pricing, security, geographic proximity, Quality of Service (QoS) parameters, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), and the like. In this fashion, contracting, leasing, coordinating, or otherwise securing additional resources from a public cloud network often proves an onerous and complex task.
The techniques herein, therefore, provide a cloud broker gateway for hybrid cloud networks, where the cloud broker gateway negotiates and/or coordinates securing computing resources between one or more public cloud(s) 110, 115 and private cloud network 105 (e.g., enterprise network), thus extending private cloud network 105 segments into public cloud datacenters. In this manner, the cloud broker gateway provides a solution to the otherwise onerous and complex task of extending the private cloud network 105 into the public cloud networks 110, 115.
Specifically, according to one or more embodiments of this disclosure, as described in detail below, the cloud broker gateway may receive requests for computing resources from a private cloud network (e.g., private cloud network 105), and negotiate amongst various public clouds networks (e.g., public cloud networks 110, 115) to identify an appropriate public cloud network for securing the computing resources specified in the request. The cloud broker gateway can further coordinate establishing a hybrid cloud between the appropriate public cloud network and the private cloud network. Notably, the cloud broker gateway may be employed as a single node/device and/or it may be employed in a distributed fashion (e.g., residing in each of the various public clouds). In some embodiments, the cloud broker gateway may also include a brokerage policy engine that stores tenant credentials for the various public clouds, ranks or prioritizes the various public clouds by, for example, tenant preferences, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), monitors historical capabilities and performance, maintains consumption statistics per tenant (and for each cloud service), catches responses from the public clouds (e.g., when a public cloud network cannot service a request for computing resources), and re-directs a rejected request to another public cloud. In further embodiments, the cloud broker gateway may map rejected requests to an event trigger, which causes the cloud broker to redirect the rejected request to another public cloud. In this fashion, the cloud broker gateway can provide a seamless transition for extending private clouds into public clouds, thus establishing a hybrid cloud environment.
Illustratively, the techniques described herein may be performed by hardware, software, and/or firmware, such as in accordance with the illustrative cloud broker process 244 and/or the illustrative cloud adapter process 248, which may contain computer executable instructions executed by the processor 220 to perform functions relating to the techniques described herein. For example, the techniques herein may be treated as extensions to conventional cloud management protocols, and as such, may be processed by similar components and devices understood in the art that execute those protocols, accordingly.
As discussed above, conventional techniques to establish a hybrid cloud environment are often complex and onerous, and may require enterprise administrators to setup and register accounts with each individual cloud provider in order to subscribe and secure cloud services.
According to the techniques disclosed herein, a cloud broker gateway, such as cloud broker gateway 400, can consolidate and store tenant credentials for each public cloud service provider and act as a proxy, using those tenant credentials, when securing computing resources from respective public cloud networks. Cloud broker gateway 400 may also monitor consumption statistics for each tenant, which may indicate services consumed over the time period by the tenant from corresponding public cloud networks.
Operatively, cloud broker gateway 400 receives a request from a tenant associated with private cloud network 305 (e.g., enterprise network) for one or more computing resources (e.g., when, for example, private cloud network 305 is out of resources). Cloud broker gateway 400 directs the request to one of the various public clouds—e.g., public cloud network 310—based on a brokerage policy for the tenant (e.g., of the enterprise network). Cloud broker gateway 400 also receives (e.g., catches) a response from public cloud network 310 to the request and determines if public cloud network 310 can service the request (e.g., if the public cloud network has capacity, bandwidth, resources, etc.). If public cloud network 310 cannot service the request, cloud broker gateway 400 re-directs the request to a second public cloud network—e.g., public cloud network 315—based on the brokerage policy for the tenant. If the second public cloud, here, public cloud network 315, can service the request for computing resources, cloud broker gateway 400 establishes a hybrid cloud network that provides access to the one or more computing resources between the second public cloud network and the enterprise network.
Inter-cloud API process 442 represents a set of routines, protocols, and tools for integrating cloud broker gateway 400 with various cloud infrastructure platforms (e.g., OpenStack, Cloudstack, VMware vCloud Director, and the like). Operatively, inter-cloud API 442 provides an outward facing graphical interface that allows customers (e.g., users, tenants, administrators, etc.) to programmatically manage workloads in a hybrid cloud environment, integrates customers with their management system of choice, and provides detailed application management, including policy and governance, application design, and the like, as is appreciated by those skilled in the art. Inter-cloud API process 442 is a module that represents routines, protocols, and tools for building, modifying, and executing certain functions of cloud broker gateway 400, as discussed herein. In this fashion, inter-cloud API process 442 provides a transparent interface between private cloud network 305 (e.g., enterprise network) and various public clouds—e.g., public cloud network 310, 315, and 320, etc.
Brokerage policy process/service 444 represents a module that provides a seamless transition for extending private network 305 into a public cloud network to create a seamless hybrid cloud environment or network. Brokerage policy process 444 coordinates securing computing resources for private network 305 from one or more alternative public cloud networks—e.g., public cloud networks 310, 315, and 320, etc. For example, brokerage policy process 444 can request computing resources from public clouds, receive responses from the cloud service providers (e.g., acknowledging or accepting the request, and/or rejecting the request), map rejections to trigger events that cause cloud broker gateway 400 to redirect the request to other, alternate cloud service providers, and secure the computing resources from one of the alternate cloud service providers. Regarding the alternate cloud service providers, cloud brokerage policy process 444 may also prioritize each alternate cloud provider according to various criteria, including, for example, tenant preferences, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), historical capabilities and performance of respective cloud service providers, billing practices, and the like. In some embodiments, brokerage policy process 444 may also execute specific troubleshooting policies, including cloud specific procedures and tools that facilitate troubleshooting hybrid cloud environments.
Operatively, brokerage policy process 444, either alone or in conjunction with one or more of the modules/processes shown, provides a framework for administrators to setup, manage, and control cloud brokerage operations. Specifically, brokerage policy process 444, when executed by cloud broker gateway 400, operates to receive requests for computing resources from tenants in a private cloud network (e.g., enterprise network), and coordinates amongst public cloud networks to secure the computing resources and establish a hybrid cloud network. With regard to coordinating amongst the public cloud networks, brokerage policy process 444 can direct and re-direct the tenant request (e.g., using respective tenant credentials for each public cloud service stored in inter-cloud API 442) public cloud networks that can service the requested computing resources. In this fashion, brokerage policy process 444 can receive responses from public cloud networks, e.g., response return codes, representational state transfer (REST) return codes, and the like, and perform additional cloud broker re-direction functions. For example, in some embodiments, specific response return codes (e.g., a HTTP Return Code: 307 Temporary Redirect) may be used by cloud service providers to indicate a particular public cloud service provider cannot service the computing resources included in a request. The specific response return code(s) may cause or trigger the brokerage policy process 444 to determine a tenant-mapping or a tenant-priority for alternative cloud service providers, and redirect the request accordingly.
Affinity policy process/service 446 operates in conjunction with brokerage policy process/service 444 and ensures cloud resources allocated for a particular hybrid cloud network are secured from the same cloud network. For example, in some instances, performance and workload security (amongst other factors) may require computing resources be secured from a single public cloud. Affinity policy process 446 validates and enforces resource affinity (e.g., from a single public cloud) for tenants in a hybrid cloud environment.
In operation, if a hybrid cloud network exists between private cloud network 305 and public cloud network 315, affinity policy process 446 may tag the resources in the hybrid cloud network with an origin identifier of the public cloud network—here, public cloud network 315. Affinity policy process 446 may further police brokerage policy process 444, based on the origin identifier, and direct additional requests for computing resources to the same public cloud network—i.e., public cloud network 315. In the event public cloud network 315 cannot service the request, cloud broker gateway 400 can send a notification to the tenant of private cloud network 305 indicating the existing hybrid cloud environment cannot service the request. Alternatively, cloud broker gateway 400 may determine another public cloud network—e.g., public cloud network 320—can service the additional request as well support the underlying resource consumption, migrate the resources to public cloud network 320, and establish a new hybrid cloud environment between private cloud network 305 and public cloud network 320. Notably, certain situations may not require such affinity for cloud resources from a single cloud service provider. In these situations, cloud broker gateway 400 may establish multiple hybrid cloud environments and distribute computing resources across multiple public clouds, as is appreciated by those skilled in the art. In one or more alternative embodiments, certain situations may not require such affinity for cloud resources from a single cloud service provider. In these situations, cloud broker gateway 400 may establish multiple hybrid cloud environments and distribute computing resources across multiple public clouds, as is appreciated by those skilled in the art.
Cloud broker gateway 400, also includes a tenant billing process/service 448 for mapping and billing tenants based on consumption of cloud computing resources. Tenant billing process 448 monitors tenant consumption of cloud resources for each cloud service provider over a time period. In some embodiments, tenant billing process 448 operates in conjunction with brokerage policy process 444 to prioritize cloud service providers according to cost (or other tenant-specific billing policies).
Generally, tenant billing process 448 generates bills or invoices for tenants according to rates set by the cloud service providers. Tenant billing process 448 may accommodate various billing arrangements, including, for example, 1-to-M billing and/or 1-to-1 billing. In 1-M billing, tenant billing process 448 aggregates consumption of cloud resources under a shared tenant account (for tenants that use services of a particular public cloud network), and determines tenant-specific consumptions rates/statistics to calculate appropriate charges. Alternatively, tenant billing process 448 may perform 1-1 billing, where consumption of cloud resources by individual accounts (e.g., one account for each tenant-cloud pair) are maintained/monitored. In 1-1 billing, tenant billing process 448 calculates appropriate charges per each individual tenant account, as is appreciated by those skilled in the art.
In this fashion, cloud broker gateway 400 employs the above discussed core modules and/or adapter modules to orchestrate and/or otherwise coordinate a hybrid cloud environment(s) between, for example, private cloud network 305 and one or more public clouds 310, 315 and/or 320.
Turning now to
Referring to signaling diagram 500, private cloud network 305 sends tenant credentials (505) to cloud broker gateway 400. As discussed above, the tenant credentials may include login and/or account information for cloud service providers (e.g., public clouds). Typically, cloud broker gateway 400 uses the tenant credentials and acts as a proxy for private cloud network 305 when requesting resources from the public clouds. For example, private cloud network 305 sends a request for resources (510) to cloud broker gateway 400. Cloud broker gateway 400 receives the request, and evaluates (515) the tenant brokerage policy (in conjunction with other modules/processes discussed above) and determine an appropriate cloud service provider.
Cloud broker gateway 400 further requests the resources (520) from public cloud network 310 (e.g., using the tenant credentials provided at 505). In response, public cloud network 310 determines its resource capability (or availability) (525), and sends a response (530) to cloud broker gateway 400. Notably, the response here includes a specific representational state transfer (REST) return code—e.g., a “HTTP Return Code: 307 Temporary Redirect”. This response (530), including the REST return code, triggers a broker action and redirection (535) by cloud broker gateway 400. In particular, cloud broker gateway 400 catches the response return code, and determines an alternate public cloud service provider based on, for example, a priority of cloud service providers for the tenant.
Cloud broker gateway 400 further re-directs the request (540) to another cloud service provider—e.g., public cloud network 320—based on the priority of cloud service providers for the tenant. Public cloud network 320 evaluates its resources (not shown) and sends a response (545) to cloud broker gateway 400—here, an acceptance to service the request.
Cloud broker gateway 400 receives the response and performs operations to establish a hybrid cloud instances (550) between public cloud network 320 and private cloud 305—e.g., a hybrid cloud network is established (550).
As shown, enterprise cloud manager 605 sends a request 601 to cloud broker gateway 610, which is hosted by public cloud network 310. Cloud broker gateway 610 determines public cloud network 310 cannot service the request, and redirects the request (e.g., redirected request 602) to public cloud network 315 based on, for example, its brokerage policy process/service, affinity policy process/service, and the like. Cloud broker gateway 615 receives the redirected request 602, determines public cloud network 315 cannot service the request, and sends a response/rejection (e.g., a rejection code such as an HTTP return code) to cloud broker gateway 610 indicating the same.
Cloud broker gateway 615 further determines that its brokerage policy process for a tenant associated with the initial request 601 provides a third option for securing cloud computing resources—here, public cloud network 320. Accordingly, cloud broker gateway 615 redirects the request (e.g., redirected request 603) to a cloud broker gateway 620 hosted by public cloud network 320. Cloud broker gateway 620 receives redirected request 603, determines public cloud network 320 can service the request, and sends a response to cloud broker gateway 610 indicating the same.
Cloud broker gateway 610 then sends a response 604 to enterprise cloud manager 605 indicating public cloud 320 can service the request. Subsequently, enterprise cloud manager 605 and cloud broker gateway 620 establish a hybrid cloud network 640 between enterprise gateway 306 and cloud broker gateway 321.
Hybrid cloud network 640 extends resources beyond private cloud network 305 into public cloud network 320, with enterprise cloud manager 605 operating in conjunction with the respective cloud broker gateways to provision the requested computing resources. As is appreciated by those skilled in the art, hybrid cloud network 640 may represent an overlay network between private cloud network 305 and public cloud network 320. It is also appreciated that the illustrated component blocks representing enterprise cloud manager 605, the respective cloud broker gateways 615, 615, and 620, respective gateways 306, 311, 316, 321, and the like, are shown for purposes of illustration, not limitation. The various component blocks may include specific network elements, including computers, network appliances, servers, storage devices, computation devices, routers, switches, gateways, bridges, load balancers, firewalls, processors, modules, or any other suitable device, component, element, or object operable to exchange information in a network environment. Moreover, the various component blocks may include any suitable hardware, software, components, modules, interfaces, or objects that facilitate the operations thereof. This may be inclusive of appropriate algorithms and communication protocols that allow for the effective exchange of data or information.
Enterprise cloud manager 605 and/or the respective cloud broker gateways address the dynamic (e.g., on-demand) and often complex task of securing cloud-based resources and establishing secure hybrid cloud environments. In this fashion, the respective cloud broker gateways can transparently and seamlessly accommodate tenant requests for cloud-based services and, in some embodiments, even provide tenants with information from respective cloud service providers such as discounts, unique service offerings (e.g., file-sharing, big data, etc.), and the like.
As described above, the cloud broker gateway may map, at step 715, one or more return codes to a trigger event such as a broker re-direction event (when, for example, a request for resources is rejected by a cloud service provider). The cloud broker gateway further receives, at step 720, a request from a tenant associated with the enterprise network for one or more computing resources. In response, the cloud broker gateway directs, at step 725, the request to one of the clouds based on a brokerage policy for the tenant (e.g., a priority mapping, bandwidth, pricing, security, geographic proximity, Quality of Service (QoS) parameters, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), and the like). Here, the cloud broker gateway directs the request to the first cloud.
The first cloud evaluates its capability and sends a response, which is received by the cloud broker gateway at step 730. As shown, the response indicates the first cloud cannot provide the one or more computing resources. As discussed above, the response may include a specific REST return code, which represents a trigger event, at step 735. In particular, the trigger event causes the cloud broker gateway to re-direct the request to the second cloud, which second cloud may be selected based on the tenant cloud brokerage policy, discussed above. The cloud broker gateway further receives a second response, at step 740, indicating the second cloud can provide the one or more computing resources. Following the second response, the cloud broker gateway coordinates or otherwise establishes a hybrid cloud at step 745 between the enterprise network and the second cloud.
In some embodiments, as discussed above, the cloud broker gateway may also include an affinity policy, which ensures cloud resources allocated for a particular hybrid cloud network are secured from the same cloud. For example, in step 750, the cloud broker gateway may receive one or more additional requests for computing resources and, according to the affinity policy, the cloud broker gateway may secure the computing resources indicated by the additional request from the same cloud—here, the second cloud. Procedure 700 may illustratively end at step 755, or it may continue receive additional requests from tenants and establish respective hybrid cloud environments accordingly. Optionally, the cloud broker gateway may also terminate the hybrid cloud environment (e.g., based on a termination request from a tenant).
It should be noted that while certain steps within procedure 700 may be optional, and further, the steps shown in
The techniques herein provide a cloud broker gateway that provides a seamless way for tenants to request cloud-based resources and for establishing hybrid cloud environments. These techniques may operate on-demand and provide a flexible and scalable framework for extending enterprise networks into public cloud networks. These techniques are transparent to enterprise tenants and allow administrators an ability to manage cloud resource allocation amongst multiple cloud service providers (e.g., prioritize preferences), specify certain cloud billing options, and maintain secure hybrid cloud environments based on affinity policies.
While there have been shown and described illustrative embodiments that cloud broker gateway functions, it is to be understood that various other adaptations and modifications may be made within the spirit and scope of the embodiments herein. For example, the embodiments have been shown and described herein with relation to one hybrid cloud between an enterprise network and a public cloud. However, the embodiments in their broader sense are not as limited, and may, in fact, be used with any number of enterprise networks, public clouds, and the like.
The foregoing description has been directed to specific embodiments. It will be apparent, however, that other variations and modifications may be made to the described embodiments, with the attainment of some or all of their advantages. For instance, it is expressly contemplated that the components and/or elements described herein can be implemented as software being stored on a tangible (non-transitory) computer-readable medium, devices, and memories (e.g., disks/CDs/RAM/EEPROM/etc.) having program instructions executing on a computer, hardware, firmware, or a combination thereof. Further, methods describing the various functions and techniques described herein can be implemented using computer-executable instructions that are stored or otherwise available from computer readable media. Such instructions can comprise, for example, instructions and data which cause or otherwise configure a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or special purpose processing device to perform a certain function or group of functions. Portions of computer resources used can be accessible over a network. The computer executable instructions may be, for example, binaries, intermediate format instructions such as assembly language, firmware, or source code. Examples of computer-readable media that may be used to store instructions, information used, and/or information created during methods according to described examples include magnetic or optical disks, flash memory, USB devices provided with non-volatile memory, networked storage devices, and so on. In addition, devices implementing methods according to these disclosures can comprise hardware, firmware and/or software, and can take any of a variety of form factors. Typical examples of such form factors include laptops, smart phones, small form factor personal computers, personal digital assistants, and so on. Functionality described herein also can be embodied in peripherals or add-in cards. Such functionality can also be implemented on a circuit board among different chips or different processes executing in a single device, by way of further example. Instructions, media for conveying such instructions, computing resources for executing them, and other structures for supporting such computing resources are means for providing the functions described in these disclosures. Accordingly this description is to be taken only by way of example and not to otherwise limit the scope of the embodiments herein. Therefore, it is the object of the appended claims to cover all such variations and modifications as come within the true spirit and scope of the embodiments herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5812773 | Norin | Sep 1998 | A |
5889896 | Meshinsky et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
6108782 | Fletcher et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6178453 | Mattaway et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6298153 | Oishi | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6343290 | Cossins et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6643260 | Kloth et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6683873 | Kwok et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6721804 | Rubin et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6733449 | Krishnamurthy et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6735631 | Oehrke et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6996615 | McGuire | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7054930 | Cheriton | May 2006 | B1 |
7058706 | Lyer et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7062571 | Dale et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7111177 | Chauvel et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7212490 | Kao et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7277948 | Igarashi et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7313667 | Pullela et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7379846 | Williams et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7480672 | Hahn et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7496043 | Leong et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7536476 | Alleyne | May 2009 | B1 |
7567504 | Darling et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7606147 | Luft et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7647594 | Togawa | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7773510 | Back et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7808897 | Mehta et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7881957 | Cohen et al. | Feb 2011 | B1 |
7917647 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8010598 | Tanimoto | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8028071 | Mahalingam et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8041714 | Aymeloglu et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8121117 | Amdahl et al. | Feb 2012 | B1 |
8171415 | Appleyard et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8234377 | Cohn | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8244559 | Horvitz et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8250215 | Stienhans et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8280880 | Aymeloglu et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
8284664 | Aybay et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
8301746 | Head et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8345692 | Smith | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8406141 | Couturier et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8407413 | Yucel et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8448171 | Donnellan et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8477610 | Zuo et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8495356 | Ashok et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8510469 | Portolani | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8514868 | Hill | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8532108 | Li et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8533687 | Greifeneder et al. | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8547974 | Guruswamy et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8560639 | Murphy et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8560663 | Baucke et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8589543 | Dutta et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8590050 | Nagpal et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8611356 | Yu et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8612625 | Andreis et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8630291 | Shaffer et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8639787 | Lagergren et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8656024 | Krishnan et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8660129 | Brendel | Feb 2014 | B1 |
8719804 | Jain | May 2014 | B2 |
8775576 | Hebert et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8797867 | Chen et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8805951 | Faibish et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8850182 | Fritz et al. | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8856339 | Mestery et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8909928 | Ahmad et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8918510 | Gmach et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8924720 | Raghuram et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8930747 | Levijarvi et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8938775 | Roth et al. | Jan 2015 | B1 |
8959526 | Kansal et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8977754 | Curry, Jr. et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9009697 | Breiter et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9015324 | Jackson | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9043439 | Bicket et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9049115 | Rajendran et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9063789 | Beaty et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9065727 | Liu et al. | Jun 2015 | B1 |
9075649 | Bushman et al. | Jul 2015 | B1 |
9164795 | Vincent | Oct 2015 | B1 |
9167050 | Durazzo | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9201701 | Boldyrev et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9201704 | Chang et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9203784 | Chang et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9223634 | Chang et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9244776 | Koza et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9251114 | Ancin et al. | Feb 2016 | B1 |
9264478 | Hon et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9313048 | Chang et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9361192 | Smith et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9380075 | He et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9432294 | Sharma et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
9444744 | Sharma et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9473365 | Melander et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9503530 | Niedzielski | Nov 2016 | B1 |
9558078 | Farlee et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9613078 | Vermeulen et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9628471 | Sundaram et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
9658876 | Chang et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9692802 | Bicket et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9755858 | Bagepalli et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
20020073337 | Ioele et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020143928 | Maltz et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166117 | Abrams et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020174216 | Shorey et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030018591 | Komisky | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030056001 | Mate et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030228585 | Inoko et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040004941 | Malan et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040095237 | Chen et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040131059 | Ayyakad et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040264481 | Darling et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050060418 | Sorokopud | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050125424 | Herriott et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20060104286 | Cheriton | May 2006 | A1 |
20060126665 | Ward et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060146825 | Hofstaedter et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060155875 | Cheriton | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060168338 | Bruegl et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070174663 | Crawford et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070223487 | Kajekar et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070242830 | Conrado et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080005293 | Bhargava et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080084880 | Dharwadkar | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080165778 | Ertemalp | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080198752 | Fan et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080201711 | Amir Husain | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080235755 | Blaisdell et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090006527 | Gingell, Jr. et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090019367 | Cavagnari et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090031312 | Mausolf et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090083183 | Rao et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090138763 | Arnold | May 2009 | A1 |
20090177775 | Radia et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090178058 | Stillwell, III et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182874 | Morford et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090265468 | Annambhotla et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090265753 | Anderson et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090293056 | Ferris | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090300608 | Ferris et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090313562 | Appleyard et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090323706 | Germain et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328031 | Pouyadou et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100042720 | Stienhans et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100061250 | Nugent | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100115341 | Baker et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100131765 | Bromley et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100191783 | Mason | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100192157 | Jackson et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100205601 | Abbas et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100211782 | Auradkar | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100293270 | Augenstein et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100318609 | Lahiri et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100325199 | Park | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100325441 | Laurie et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100333116 | Prahlad | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110016214 | Jackson | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110035754 | Srinivasan | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110055396 | Dehaan | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110055398 | Dehaan et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110055470 | Portolani | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110072489 | Parann-Nissany | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110075667 | Li et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110110382 | Jabr et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110116443 | Yu et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110126099 | Anderson et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110138055 | Daly et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110145413 | Dawson et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110145657 | Bishop et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110173303 | Rider | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110185063 | Head et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110213966 | Fu et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110219434 | Betz | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110231715 | Kunii et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110231899 | Pulier et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110239039 | Dieffenbach et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110252327 | Awasthi et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110261811 | Battestilli et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110261828 | Smith | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110276675 | Singh et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110276951 | Jain | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110295998 | Ferris et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110305149 | Scott et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307531 | Gaponenko et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320870 | Kenigsberg et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120005724 | Lee | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120054367 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072318 | Akiyama et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072578 | Alam | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072581 | Tung et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072985 | Davne et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072992 | Arasaratnam | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084445 | Brock et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120084782 | Chou et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120096134 | Suit | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120102193 | Rathore et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120102199 | Hopmann et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120131174 | Ferris et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120137215 | Kawara | May 2012 | A1 |
20120158967 | Sedayao et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120159097 | Jennas, II et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120167094 | Suit | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120173710 | Rodriguez | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120179909 | Sagi et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120180044 | Donnellan et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120182891 | Lee et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120185913 | Martinez et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120192016 | Gotesdyner et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120192075 | Ebtekar et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120201135 | Ding et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120203908 | Beaty | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120204169 | Breiter | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120204187 | Breiter | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120214506 | Skaaksrud et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120222106 | Kuehl | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120236716 | Anbazhagan et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120240113 | Hur | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120265976 | Spiers et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120272025 | Park et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120281706 | Agarwal et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120281708 | Chauhan et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120290647 | Ellison | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120297238 | Watson et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120311106 | Morgan | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120311568 | Jansen | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120324092 | Brown et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120324114 | Dutta et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130003567 | Gallant et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130013248 | Brugler et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130036213 | Hasan et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130044636 | Koponen et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130066940 | Shao | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130069950 | Adam | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130080509 | Wang | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130080624 | Nagai et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130091557 | Gurrapu | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130097601 | Podvratnik et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130104140 | Meng et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130111540 | Sabin | May 2013 | A1 |
20130117337 | Dunham | May 2013 | A1 |
20130124712 | Parker | May 2013 | A1 |
20130125124 | Kempf et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130138816 | Kuo et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130144978 | Jain et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130152076 | Patel | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130152175 | Hromoko et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159097 | Schory et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159496 | Hamilton et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160008 | Cawlfield et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130162753 | Hendrickson et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130169666 | Pacheco et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130179941 | McGloin et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130182712 | Aguayo et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185413 | Beaty | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185433 | Zhu et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191106 | Kephart et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130198050 | Shroff | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130198374 | Zalmanovitch et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130204849 | Chacko | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130232491 | Radhakrishnan et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130246588 | Borowicz et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130250770 | Zou et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130254415 | Fullen et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130262347 | Dodson | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130283364 | Chang | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130297769 | Chang et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130318240 | Hebert et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130318546 | Kothuri et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130339949 | Spiers et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140006481 | Frey et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140006535 | Reddy | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140006585 | Dunbar et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140040473 | Ho et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140040883 | Tompkins | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140052877 | Mao | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140059310 | Du et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140074850 | Noel et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075048 | Yuksel et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075108 | Dong et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075357 | Flores et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140075501 | Srinivasan et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140089727 | Cherkasova et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140098762 | Ghai et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140108985 | Scott et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140122560 | Ramey et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140136779 | Guha et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140140211 | Chandrasekaran et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140141720 | Princen et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140156557 | Zeng et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140164486 | Ravichandran et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140188825 | Muthukkaruppan et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140189095 | Lindberg et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140189125 | Amies et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140215471 | Cherkasova | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140222953 | Karve et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140244851 | Lee | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140245298 | Zhou et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140282536 | Dave et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140282611 | Campbell et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140282889 | Ishaya et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140289200 | Kato | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140297569 | Clark et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140297835 | Buys | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140314078 | Jilani | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140317261 | Shatzkamer et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140366155 | Chang et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140372567 | Ganesh et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150033086 | Sasturkar et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150043576 | Dixon et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150052247 | Threefoot et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150052517 | Raghu | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150058382 | St. Laurent et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150058459 | Amendjian et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150071285 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150100471 | Curry, Jr. et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150106802 | Ivanov et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150106805 | Melander et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150117199 | Chinnaiah Sankaran et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150117458 | Gurkan et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150120914 | Wada et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150178133 | Phelan et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150215819 | Bosch et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150227405 | Jan et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150242204 | Hassine et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150249709 | Teng et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150280980 | Bitar | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150281067 | Wu | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150281113 | Siciliano et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150309908 | Pearson et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150319063 | Zourzouvillys et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150326524 | Tankala et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150339210 | Kopp et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150373108 | Fleming et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160011925 | Kulkarni et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160013990 | Kulkarni et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160062786 | Meng et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160094398 | Choudhury et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160094480 | Kulkarni et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160094643 | Jain et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160099847 | Melander et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160105393 | Thakkar | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160127184 | Bursell | May 2016 | A1 |
20160134557 | Steinder et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160164914 | Madhav et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160188527 | Cherian et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160234071 | Nambiar et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160239399 | Babu et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160253078 | Ebtekar et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160254968 | Ebtekar et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160261564 | Foxhoven | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160277368 | Narayanaswamy et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160352682 | Chang | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170005948 | Melander et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170024260 | Chandrasekaran et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170026470 | Bhargava et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170041342 | Efremov | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170054659 | Ergin et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170063674 | Maskalik | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170097841 | Chang et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170099188 | Chang et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170104755 | Arregoces et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170147297 | Krishnamurthy et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20170171158 | Hoy et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170264663 | Bicket et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101719930 | Jun 2010 | CN |
101394360 | Jul 2011 | CN |
102164091 | Aug 2011 | CN |
104320342 | Jan 2015 | CN |
105740084 | Jul 2016 | CN |
2228719 | Sep 2010 | EP |
2439637 | Apr 2012 | EP |
2645253 | Nov 2014 | EP |
10-2015-0070676 | May 2015 | KR |
M394537 | Dec 2010 | TW |
WO 2009155574 | Dec 2009 | WO |
WO 2010030915 | Mar 2010 | WO |
WO 2013158707 | Oct 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Nair, Srijith K. et al., “Towards secure cloud bursting, brokerage and aggregation,” 2012, www.flexiant.com. |
Son, Jungmin, “Automatic decision system for efficient resource selection and allocation in inter-clouds,” Jun. 2013, http://www.cloudbus.org/. |
Author Unknown, “5 Benefits of a Storage Gateway in the Cloud,” Blog, TwinStrata, Inc., Jul. 25, 2012, XP055141645, 4 pages, https://web.archive.org/web/20120725092619/http://blog.twinstrata.com/2012/07/10//5-benefits-of-a-storage-gateway-in-the-cloud. |
Author Unknown, “Joint Cisco and VMWare Solution for Optimizing Virtual Desktop Delivery: Data Center 3.0: Solutions to Accelerate Data Center Virtualization,” Cisco Systems, Inc. and VMware, Inc., Sep. 2008, 10 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Open Data Center Alliance Usage: Virtual Machine (VM) Interoperability in a Hybrid Cloud Environment Rev. 1.2,” Open Data Center Alliance, Inc., 2013, 18 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Real-Time Performance Monitoring on Juniper Networks Devices, Tips and Tools for Assessing and Analyzing Network Efficiency,” Juniper Networks, Inc., May 2010, 35 pages. |
Beyer, Steffen, “Module “Data:locations?!”,” YAPC::Europe, London, UK,ICA, Sep. 22-24, 2000, XP002742700, 15 pages. |
Borovick, Lucinda, et al., “Architecting the Network for the Cloud,” IDC White Paper, Jan. 2011, 8 pages. |
Bosch, Greg, “Virtualization,” last modified Apr. 2012 by B. Davison, 33 pages. |
Broadcasters Audience Research Board, “What's Next,” http://lwww.barb.co.uk/whats-next, accessed Jul. 22, 2015, 2 pages. |
Cisco Systems, Inc. “Best Practices in Deploying Cisco Nexus 1000V Series Switches on Cisco UCS B and C Series Cisco UCS Manager Servers,” Cisco White Paper, Apr. 2011, 36 pages, http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps9441/ps9902/white_paper_c11-558242.pdf. |
Cisco Systems, Inc., “Cisco Unified Network Services: Overcome Obstacles to Cloud-Ready Deployments,” Cisco White Paper, Jan. 2011, 6 pages. |
Cisco Systems, Inc., “Cisco Intercloud Fabric: Hybrid Cloud with Choice, Consistency, Control and Compliance,” Dec. 10, 2014, 22 pages. |
Cisco Technology, Inc., “Cisco Expands Videoscape TV Platform Into the Cloud,” Jan. 6, 2014, Las Vegas, Nevada, Press Release, 3 pages. |
CSS Corp, “Enterprise Cloud Gateway (ECG)—Policy driven framework for managing multi-cloud environments,” original published on or about Feb. 11, 2012; 1 page; http://www.css-cloud.com/platform/enterprise-cloud-gateway.php. |
Fang K., “LISP MAC-EID-TO-RLOC Mapping (LISP based L2VPN),” Network Working Group, Internet Draft, CISCO Systems, Jan. 2012, 12 pages. |
Herry, William, “Keep It Simple, Stupid: OpenStack nova-scheduler and its algorithm”, May 12, 2012, IBM, 12 pages. |
Hewlett-Packard Company, “Virtual context management on network devices”, Research Disclosure, vol. 564, No. 60, Apr. 1, 2011, Mason Publications, Hampshire, GB, Apr. 1, 2011, 524. |
Juniper Networks, Inc., “Recreating Real Application Traffic in Junosphere Lab,” Solution Brief, Dec. 2011, 3 pages. |
Kenhui, “Musings on Cloud Computing and IT-as-a-Service: [Updated for Havana] Openstack Computer for VSphere Admins, Part 2: Nova-Scheduler and DRS”, Jun. 26, 2013, Cloud Architect Musings, 12 pages. |
Kolyshkin, Kirill, “Virtualization in Linux,” Sep. 1, 2006, XP055141648, 5 pages, https://web.archive.org/web/20070120205111/http://download.openvz.org/doc/openvz-intro.pdf. |
Lerach, S.R.O., “Golem,” http://www.lerach.cz/en/products/golem, accessed Jul. 22, 2015, 2 pages. |
Linthicum, David, “VM Import could be a game changer for hybrid clouds”, InfoWorld, Dec. 23, 2010, 4 pages. |
Naik, Vijay K., et al., “Harmony: A Desktop Grid for Delivering Enterprise Computations,” Grid Computing, 2003, Fourth International Workshop on Proceedings, Nov. 17, 2003, pp. 1-11. |
Nielsen, “SimMetry Audience Measurement—Technology,” http://www.nielsen-admosphere.eu/products-and-services/simmetry-audience-measurement-technology/, accessed Jul. 22, 2015, 6 pages. |
Nielsen, “Television,” http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/solutions/measurement/television.html, accessed Jul. 22, 2015, 4 pages. |
Open Stack, “Filter Scheduler,” updated Dec. 17, 2017, 5 pages, accessed on Dec. 18, 2017, https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/user/filter-scheduler.html. |
Rabadan, J., et al., “Operational Aspects of Proxy-ARP/ND in EVPN Networks,” BESS Worksgroup Internet Draft, draft-snr-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-02, Oct. 6, 2015, 22 pages. |
Saidi, Ali, et al., “Performance Validation of Network-Intensive Workloads on a Full-System Simulator,” Interaction between Operating System and Computer Architecture Workshop, (IOSCA 2005), Austin, Texas, Oct. 2005, 10 pages. |
Shunra, “Shunra for HP Software; Enabling Confidence in Application Performance Before Deployment,” 2010, 2 pages. |
Wikipedia, “Filter (software)”, Wikipedia, Feb. 8, 2014, 2 pages, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Filter_%28software%29&oldid=594544359. |
Wikipedia; “Pipeline (Unix)”, Wikipedia, May 4, 2014, 4 pages, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pipeline2/028Unix%29&oldid=606980114. |
Amedro, Brian, et al., “An Efficient Framework for Running Applications on Clusters, Grids and Cloud,” 2010, 17 pages. |
Author Unknown, “A Look at DeltaCloud: The Multi-Cloud API,” Feb. 17, 2012, 4 pages. |
Author Unknown, “About Deltacloud,” Apache Software Foundation, Aug. 18, 2013, 1 page. |
Author Unknown, “Architecture for Managing Clouds, A White Paper from the Open Cloud Standards Incubator,” Version 1.0.0, Document No. DSP-IS0102, Jun. 18, 2010, 57 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Cloud Infrastructure Management Interface—Common Information Model (CIMI-CIM),” Document No. DSP0264, Version 1.0.0, Dec. 14, 2012, 21 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Cloud Infrastructure Management Interface (CIMI) Primer,” Document No. DSP2027, Version 1.0.1, Sep. 12, 2012, 30 pages. |
Author Unknown, “cloudControl Documentation,” Aug. 25, 2013, 14 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Interoperable Clouds, A White Paper from the Open Cloud Standards Incubator,” Version 1.0.0, Document No. DSP-IS0101, Nov. 11, 2009, 21 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Microsoft Cloud Edge Gateway (MCE) Series Appliance,” Iron Networks, Inc., 2014, 4 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Use Cases and Interactions for Managing Clouds, A White Paper from the Open Cloud Standards Incubator,” Version 1.0.0, Document No. DSP-ISO0103, Jun. 16, 2010, 75 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Apache Ambari Meetup What's New,” Hortonworks Inc., Sep. 2013, 28 pages. |
Author Unknown, “Introduction,” Apache Ambari project, Apache Software Foundation, 2014, 1 page. |
Citrix, “Citrix StoreFront 2.0” White Paper, Proof of Concept Implementation Guide, Citrix Systems, Inc., 2013, 48 pages. |
Citrix, “CloudBridge for Microsoft Azure Deployment Guide,” 30 pages. |
Citrix, “Deployment Practices and Guidelines for NetScaler 10.5 on Amazon Web Services,” White Paper, citrix.com, 2014, 14 pages. |
Gedymin, Adam, “Cloud Computing with an emphasis on Google App Engine,” Sep. 2011, 146 pages. |
Good, Nathan A., “Use Apache Deltacloud to administer multiple instances with a single API,” Dec. 17, 2012, 7 pages. |
Kunz, Thomas, et al., “OmniCloud—The Secure and Flexible Use of Cloud Storage Services,” 2014, 30 pages. |
Logan, Marcus, “Hybrid Cloud Application Architecture for Elastic Java-Based Web Applications,” F5 Deployment Guide Version 1.1, 2016, 65 pages. |
Lynch, Sean, “Monitoring cache with Claspin” Facebook Engineering, Sep. 19, 2012, 5 pages. |
Meireles, Fernando Miguel Dias, “Integrated Management of Cloud Computing Resources,” 2013-2014, 286 pages. |
Mu, Shuai, et al., “uLibCloud: Providing High Available and Uniform Accessing to Multiple Cloud Storages,” 2012 IEEE, 8 pages. |
Sun, Aobing, et al., “IaaS Public Cloud Computing Platform Scheduling Model and Optimization Analysis,” Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences, 2011, 4, 803-811, 9 pages. |
Szymaniak, Michal, et al., “Latency-Driven Replica Placement”, vol. 47 No. 8, IPSJ Journal, Aug. 2006, 12 pages. |
Toews, Everett, “Introduction to Apache jclouds,” Apr. 7, 2014, 23 pages. |
Von Laszewski, Gregor, et al., “Design of a Dynamic Provisioning System for a Federated Cloud and Bare-metal Environment,” 2012, 8 pages. |
Ye, Xianglong, et al., “A Novel Blocks Placement Strategy for Hadoop,” 2012 IEEE/ACTS 11th International Conference on Computer and Information Science, 2012 IEEE, 5 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170339070 A1 | Nov 2017 | US |