Moving to the Cloud Requires Companies to Focus on Dynamic Workloads
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Moving to the Cloud Requires Companies to Focus on Dynamic Workloads

on

  • 698 views

Transcript of a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast on modernizing IT to become business service factories.

Transcript of a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast on modernizing IT to become business service factories.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
698
Views on SlideShare
698
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Moving to the Cloud Requires Companies to Focus on Dynamic Workloads Moving to the Cloud Requires Companies to Focus on Dynamic Workloads Document Transcript

    • Moving to the Cloud Requires Companies to Focus onDynamic WorkloadsTranscript of a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast on modernizing IT to become business servicefactories.Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Sponsor:WSO2Dana Gardner: Hi. This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and youre listening to BriefingsDirect. Today, we present a sponsored podcast discussion on the role and importance of private cloud infrastructure models as a stepping stone to much needed new operational models for IT. A lot of the interest in cloud computing generally has been as much about awish to escape the complex and wasteful ways of the old as an embrace of something wellunderstood and new. [Disclosure: WSO2 is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]So, how do large enterprises remake themselves into business service factories? How do theymodernize IT and Internet-enabled ecosystem processes in the same ways that industrialengineering, lean manufacturing, efficiency measurement, just-in-time inventory, and variousmaturity models revolutionized bricks and mortar businesses a generation ago?This larger question of how to attain IT transformation is what cloud computing purports toanswer. But, the question itself may be more important than any yet defined answer. If publiccloud computing is an end goal that provides a catalyst to such needed general transformation, allends well and good.Meanwhile, what of the practical steps that can help an organization now? How can enterpriseslearn to adopt new services sourcing models as well as to attain the means for better consumptionof services, regardless of their origins?Today, we’ll examine how enterprises can appreciate the transformative role of private cloud andbegin to focus on dynamic workloads and agile middleware as essential enablers along the wayto even larger process-level business benefit, and then ultimately to a more fully cloud-based ITmodel.To discuss how workload assembly in the private cloud domain provides a big step in the rightdirection for IT’s future, were joined by Paul Fremantle, the UK-based Chief Technology Officerand co-founder of WSO2. Welcome, Paul.Paul Fremantle: Hi, Dana. How are you doing?
    • Gardner: Im well, thank you. We are also here today with Paul O’Connor, Chief TechnologyOfficer at ANATAS International in Sydney, Australia. Welcome to you as well, Paul.Thanks, Dana.Gardner: Paul O’Connor, tell me a little bit about why a transformative new approach to IT isnecessary. It seems as if incremental improvement is just not good enough.Past failuresOConnor: It’s unfortunate, but it’s fair to say that all of the past initiatives that we tried in large, complex enterprises have been a failure. In some cases, we’ve actually made things worse. Large enterprises, at the same time, still have to focus on efficiency, agility, and delivery to their end users, so as to achieve market competitiveness. We still have that maniacal focus on delivery and efficiency, and now some new thinking has come in. Specifically, we have cloud or the everything-as-a-service operating model coupled with a series of other trends in the industry that are being bolted togetherfor a final assault on meaningful efficiency. You hit the nail on the head when you mentionedindustrial engineering, because industrial engineering is the organizing principle for weaving allof these facets together.When we focus on industrial engineering, we already have an established pattern. The techniquesare now lean manufacturing, process improvement and measurement of efficiency, just-in-timeinventory, maturity models. Ultimately, large enterprises are now approaching the problemeffectively including cloud, including moving to new operating models. Theyre really focusingon building out that factory. Im sure we’ll be able to tease out some of those specifics at aslightly lower level of detail as the podcast goes on.Gardner: Well, great. Maybe you could also tell us a little bit more about ANATASInternational; what sort of organization is that and what do you do there?OConnor: Im CTO. We serve the Asia-Pacific region and have focused for a number of yearson next-gen architecture -- technical architecture, enterprise architecture and service orientedarchitecture (SOA). In the last couple of years, we’ve been focusing as well on cloud, and onhow these things come together to give us a shot at being more efficient in large complexenterprises.Gardner: Paul Fremantle, why do you think that the idea of cloud computing has really caughton, whether it’s private cloud, public cloud, platform as a service (PaaS), or infrastructure as aservice (IaaS). Were adding more as services all the time, but this really seems to have justcaught in people’s attention in the last two or three years, and seems to gain. It doesn’t seem to
    • be waning. Is it this need for a transformative approach that has made this somewhat of a silverbullet? Why is this so important to people?Fremantle: It’s a fairly straightforward story. Weve discovered that you cannot just build an IT system or an IT infrastructure, put your feet up, sit back, and say, "Well, that will do the business," because the business has learned that IT itself is transformative and you have to be pushing the boundaries in order to compete in the modern world. Effectively, it’s no longer good enough to just put in a new system in every 5 or 10 years and sit back and run it. People are constantly pushing to create new value to build new processes, to find better ways of using what they have, linking it together, composing it, and doing new things.So the speed of delivery and the agility of organizations have become absolutely key to theircompetitiveness and fundamentally to their stock price. A huge move in agility came first withweb, with portals, and with SOA. People discovered that, rather than writing things from scratch,they could reuse, they could reconfigure, and they could attach things together in new ways tobuild function. As they did that, the speed of development and the speed of creating these newprocesses has skyrocketed.Unfortunately, the speed and agility of the infrastructure and of the ability to take these thingsand host them has not kept up. What cloud has done is that it has suddenly energized theinfrastructure, energized the platform, and has given people a way of not just building thingsquickly but hosting them, deploying them, and managing them in an agile way. Fundamentally,what’s driving the cloud revolution is speed of delivery.Gardner: I’ll go back to Paul O’Connor with his comments about architecture. As we do whatPaul Fremantle has suggested, we seem to also hit up against scale. Automation needs to kick in,and that can perhaps only be best attained through an architecture built for scale. How do themodern platforms and systems that Paul Fremantle is discussing provide a catalyst, or at least acohort, to this need for better architecture, Paul O’Connor?Better architectureOConnor: When we say better architecture, I think what we are talking about is the facets ofarchitecture that are about process, that are about that how you actually design and build anddeliver. At the end of the day, architecture is about change, and it must be agile. I can architect afantastic Sydney Opera House, but if I cant organize the construction materials to show up in astructured way, then I can’t construct it. Effectively, we’ve embraced that concept now in largeenterprises.Specifically in IT, we find coming into play around this concept a lot of the same capabilities thatwe’ve already developed, some of which Paul alluded to, plus things like policy based, model-driven configuration and governance, management and monitoring and asset metadata, asset
    • lifecycle management types of things relative to services and the underlying assets that areneeded to actually provision and manage them.Were seeing those brought to bear against the difficult problems of how might I create a veryagile architecture that requires an order of magnitude less people to deliver and manage.It helps with problems like this: How can I keep configured a thousand end points in myenterprise, some of which might be everything from existing servers and web farms all the wayup to instances of lean middleware like WSO2 that I might spin up in the cloud to process largeworkloads and all of the data associated with it?Gardner: I suppose also, Paul Fremantle, that a secondary or additional motivator at this time isthe need for pervasive security, for baking security and governance in across the board, not as abolt-on, not as an afterthought, not as some sort a requirement of that is separate and distinctfrom the entire IT lifecycle.So, is there also a bit of a catalyst when it comes to making security pervasive thats also drivingfolks to better architecture and more agile middleware that will perhaps ultimately move towardsa cloud-based model?Fremantle: Absolutely. The biggest concern in everyones mind around cloud is security. I think theres an opportunity to turn that from a negative into a positive by fundamentally building secure systems from day one, rather than just relying on them being secure from where they are located, which is kind of the current model. Im a firm believer that the real success in cloud is going to come fromdesigning systems that are inherently built to run in the cloud, whether thats about scale,elasticity, security, or things like multi-tenancy and self-service.Those concepts of building things that run in the cloud and making the software inherently cloudaware, comes back to what Paul OConnor was talking about with regard to having the rightarchitecture for the future and for the cloud.Gardner: So, when we look at security as a positive, rather than a negative, as we transform andtransition with cloud models, is there more than one layer or level of security? How do weapproach this? How do we get our hands around it, so that it can be something thatsimplemented, rather than almost just at the division or abstract level?Federated securityFremantle: The first and most important thing is to use middleware and models that aredesigned around federated security. This is just a simple thing. If you look back at middleware,
    • for example message queuing products from 10 years ago, there was no inherent security inthem.If you look at the SOA stack and the SOAP models or even REST models, there are inherentsecurity models such as WS-Trust, WS-SecureConversation, or in the REST model things likeSAML2, OAuth and OpenID. These models allow you to build highly secure systems.But, however much I think its possible to build secure cloud systems, the reality is that today 90percent of my customers are not willing or interested in hosting things in a public cloud. It’sdriving a huge demand for private cloud. That’s going to change, as people gain confidence andas they start to protect and rebuild their systems with federated security in mind from day one,but thats going to take some time.Gardner: Paul O’Connor, do you share Paul Fremantles concept that good architecture andbuilding for cloud models has an inherent security benefit to it? Are you at ANATAS alsoarchitecting for both security and a services factory model?OConnor: Absolutely. Youre not allowed to do anything in large enterprises architecturallywithout getting past security. When I say get past security, Im talking about the people who havemagnifying glasses on your architectural content documents. Its important enough to say againwhat Paul brought out about location not being the way to secure your customer data anymore.The motivation for a new security model is not just in terms of movement all the way to the otherend of the agility rainbow, where in a public cloud you’re mashing up some of your data witheverybody elses, potentially, and concerned about it going astray.It’s really about that internal factory configuration and design that says, even internally in largeenterprises, I cant rely on having zones of network security that I pin my security architecture to.I have to do it at the message level. I have to use some of the standards and the technologies thatweve seen evolved over the past five, six, seven years that Paul Fremantle was referencing toreally come to bear to keep me secure.Once I do that, then its not that far of a leap to conceive of an environment where those samesecurity structures, technologies, and processes can be used in a more hybrid architecture, wheremaybe its not just secure internal private cloud, but maybe its virtual private cloud runningoutside of the enterprise.That brings in other facets that we really have to sort out. They have to do with how we sourcethat capacity, even if its virtual private cloud or even if its tenanted. We have to work on ourzone security model that talks about whats allowed to be where. We have to profile our data andunderstand how our data relates to workloads.As Paul mentioned, we have to focus on federated identity and trust, so identity as a service. Wehave to assemble the way that processing environments, be they internal or external, get theiridentities, so that they can enforce security. PKI, and, this is a big one, we have to get ourcertificates and private keys into the right spot.
    • Policy-driven governanceOnce we build all those foundations for this, we then have to focus on policy-driven governanceof how workloads are assembled with respect to all of those different security facets and all ofthe other facets, including quality of service, capacity, cost, and everything else. But, ultimatelyyes, we can solve this and we will solve this over the next few years. All this makes for good,effective security architecture in general. Its just a matter of helping people, through forums likethis, to think about it in a slightly different way.Gardner: As were moving towards new kinds of architectures that can be inclusive of the past,but prepare us better for the future with this full set of requirements in terms of scalability,security, openness to sourcing elasticity, and so forth, what do we need to look for in terms of theunderlying infrastructure itself?Are there some key requirements that we would look for in terms of how the performance,technical characteristics, standard support, all come together in such a way that we can moveforward including compatibility with whats in place, and still start meeting up with what wewant around performance, the sourcing flexibility and security. Let me take that first to PaulFremantle. What needs to be in place?Fremantle: I believe that the world has slightly gone backwards, and that isnt actually thatsurprising. When people move forward into such a big jump as to move from a fixedinfrastructure to a cloud infrastructure, sometimes its kind of easy to move back in another area.I think whats happened to some extent is that, as people have moved forward into cloudinfrastructure, they have tended to build very straightforward monolithic applications.The way that they have done that is to focus on, "Im going to take something standalone andsimple that I can cloud-enable and thats going to be my first cloud project." Whats happened isthat people have avoided the complexity of saying,"What I really need to be doing is buildingcomposite applications with federated identity, with business process management (BPM), ESBflows, and so forth."And, thats not that surprising, when theyre taking on something new. But, very rapidly, peopleare going to realize that a cloud app on its own is just as isolated as an enterprise app that canttalk to anything.The result is that people are going to need to move up the stack. At the moment, everyone is veryfocused on virtual machines (VMs) and IaaS. That doesnt help you with all the things that PaulOConnor has been talking about with architecture, scalability, and building systems that aregoing to really be transformative and change the way you do things.From my perspective, the way that you do that is that you stop focusing on VMs and you try andmove up a layer, and start thinking about PaaS instead of IaaS.
    • You try to build things that use inherent cloud capabilities offered by a platform that give youscalability, federated security, identity, billing, all the things that you are going to need in thatcloud environment that you dont want to have to write and build yourself. You want a platformto provide that. Thats really where the world is going to have to move in order to take the fulladvantage of cloud -- PaaS.Gardner: Paul OConnor, from your perspective, what are some key characteristics that thatplatform should have? What are the necessary ingredients in order to make this automated,controllable, governed, and to scale across these new sourcing models that were approaching?The name of the gameOConnor: I totally agree with everything Paul Fremantle just said. PaaS is the name of thegame. If you go to 10 large enterprises, youre going to find them by and large focusing on IaaS.Thats fine. Its a much lower barrier of entry relative to where most shops are currently in termsof virtualization.But, when you get up into delivering new value, youre really creating that factory. Just to drawan analogy, you dont go to an auto factory, where the workers are meant to be programmingrobots. They build cars. Same thing with business service delivery in IT -- its really important toplug your reference model and your reference architectures for cloud into that factory approach.You want your PaaS to be a one-stop-shop for business service production and that means fromthe very beginning to the very end. You have to tenant and support your customers all along theway. So it really takes the vertical stack, which is the way we currently think about cloud interms of IaaS, and fans it out horizontally, so that we have a place to plug different customers inthe enterprise into that.And what we find is, just as in any good factory or any good process design, we really focus onwhat it is those customers need and when. For example, just to take one of many things thatstypically broken in large enterprises, testing and test environments. Sometimes it takes weeks inlarge organization to get test environments. We see customers who literally forgo key parts oftesting and really sort of do a big bang test approach at the end, because it is so difficult to getenvironment and to manage the configuration of those environments.One of the ways we can fix that is by organizing that part of the PaaS story and wrap aroundsome of the attendant next-generation configuration management capabilities that go along withthat. That would include things like service test virtualization, agile operations, asset metadatamanagement, some of the application lifecycle management (ALM) stuff, and focus onsystemically killing the biggest impedances in the order of most pain in the enterprise. You cando that without worrying about, or going anywhere near, public cloud to go do data processing.So thats the here and now, and Id say that thats also supportive of a longer term, grand unifiedfield theory of cloud, which is about consuming IT entirely as a service. To do that, we have toget our house in order in the same way and focus on organizing and re-organizing in terms of
    • transformation in the enterprise to support first the internal customers, followed by using thesame presets and tenets to focus on getting outside of the organization in a very structured way.But eventually moving workloads out of the organization and focusing on direct interaction withthe business, I think we will see larger appetites by the business for more applications and a needto put them into a place where they are more easily managed, and eventually, it may take 20years, but I think youll see organizations move to turn off their internal IT departments and focuson business, focus on being an insurance company, a bank, or a logistics company. But, we startin the here and now with PaaS.Gardner: Okay. Paul OConnor, if I can just add one more thing to that. I read in some of yourliterature -- and I quote from you -- “Work load assembly in the cloud is the name of the game.”It seems that youre talking about private cloud first, then, ultimately, any number of other hybridcloud scenarios. Is that what you mean across this development, test, deploy, workloadassembly? What do you mean by that?What is it doing?OConnor: Workload Assembly. What I mean by that is that we need a profile of what it is wedo in terms of work. If I plug a job into the wall that is my next-gen IT architecture, what is itactually doing and how will I know? The types of things vary. It varies widely between phases ofmy development cycle.Obviously, if I do load and performance testing, Ive got a large workload. If I do production,I’ve got a large workload. If I move to big data, and I am starting to do massively scalar analyticsbecause the business realizes that you go after such an application, thanks to where IT is takingthe enterprise, then thats a whole other ball of wax again.What I have to do is understand those workloads. I have to understand them in terms of the datathat they operate on, especially in terms of its confidentiality. I have to understand whatrequirements I need to assemble in terms of the workload processing.If I have identify show up, or private key, I have to do integration, or I have to wire into differentsystems and data sources, all of that has to be understood and assembled with that workload. Ihave to characterize workload in a very specific way, because ultimately I want to use somethinglike WSO2 Stratos to assemble what that workload needs to run. Once I can assemble it, then itbecomes even easier for me to work my way through the dev, test, stage, release, operate cycle.Gardner: Paul Fremantle, tell me what WSO2 is doing to help people like Paul OConnor reachthis workload assembly capability?Fremantle: What we have done is build our Carbon middleware on OSGi. About two years ago,we started thinking how were going to make that really effective in a cloud environment. Wecame up with this concept of cloud-native software. We were lucky, because, having modularizedCarbon, we had also kernelized it. We put everything around a single kernel. So, we were able tomake that kernel operate in a cloud environment.
    • That’s the engineering viewpoint, but from the architecture viewpoint, what were providing toarchitects like Paul O’Connor is a complete platform that gives you what you need to build outall of the great things that Paul O’Connor has been talking about.That starts with some very simple things, like identity as a service, so that there is a consistentmulti-tenant concept of identity, authorization, and entitlement available wherever you are in theprivate cloud, or the public cloud, or hybrid.The next thing, which we think absolutely vital, is governance monitoring, metering, and billing,all available as a service, so that you can see whats happening in this cloud. You can monitor andmeter it, you can allocate cost to the right people, whether that’s a public bill or an internal reportwithin a private cloud.Then, were saying that as you build out this cloud, you need the right infrastructure to be able tobuild these assemblies and to be able to scale. You need to have a cloud native app server thatcan be deployed in the cloud and elastically scale up and down. You need to have an ESB as aservice that can be used to link together different cloud applications, whether theyre publiccloud, private cloud, or a combination of the two.Pulling togetherAnd, you need to have things like business process in the cloud, portal in the cloud, and so on, topull these things together. Of course, on the way, youre going to need things like queues ordatabases. So, what were doing with Stratos is pulling together the combination of thosecomponents that you need to have a good architecture, and making them available as a service,whether its in a private cloud or a public cloud.That is absolutely vital. Its about providing people with the right building blocks. If you look atwhat the IaaS providers are doing, theyre providing people with VMs as the building blocks.Twenty years ago, if someone asked me to build an app, I would have started with the machineand the OS and I would start writing code. But, in the last 20 years weve moved up the stack. Ifsomeone asked me to build an app now, I would start with an app server, a message queuinginfrastructure, an ESB, a business process server, and a portal. All these components help me bemuch more effective and much quicker. In a cloud, those are the cloud components that you needto have lying around ready to assemble, and that to me is the answer.Gardner: Paul Fremantle, youre describing what you think is the best way to support aworkload assembly capability, but how is that different from what were seeing from some of theservice delivery platform vendors, and what we could call "cloud in a box?" Whats thedifference between what theyre talking about and what youre talking about?Fremantle: Im seeing various things in the marketplace. Obviously, there are people likeEucalyptus, Ubuntu, and of course VMware, who are providing private IaaS, and that’s very
    • important. We work on top of those layers. Im also seeing a lot of people producing PaaS. Thishas been an exciting month. Weve had two acquisitions in that space.The thing that those PaaS providers are missing, and most of the PaaS that I see out there ismissing, is a real enterprise architecture view of the world. Its fine to provide a web app as aservice and a database as a service. Those are the basic building blocks that people need. But, ifyou dont have an open, clear definition of identity, governance, business activity monitoring,BPM, and ESB, youre stuck in a 10-year-old architecture.So, for me, where youre going to have to move is to a complete platform that understandsenterprise architecture (EA). It isn’t just about saying, "Ive got a web app and a database that aresomehow provided in a cloud native fashion."Gardner: Paul OConnor, Im an advocate of showing rather than telling, when it comes to thesesorts of complex issues. Do we have any examples of perhaps companies that ANATAS hasworked with, where they have employed some of these approaches, whether from a position ofthe technology, the actual implementation of certain products and services, the methodologies, orall of the above? What do you get? What happens when you do this properly? What sort ofbusiness and/or technical benefits can we expect based on the record so far?OConnor: Ill tell you about a large enterprise that we have been working with for a good longwhile. They are building an internal PaaS, an internal platform which is operated as a service.This is key. Theyre looking at that as a way to achieve some tangible benefits right out of thegate, while supporting a longer-term vision, which is about beating back into submission asmuch of the sprawl that has grown up over the course of time in large enterprises.The immediate benefits in that case are about efficiency and business service architecture andconstraints. By that, I mean that if you have one standard service delivery process that’s highlyefficient that starts with modeling and works its way all the way through to operation in abusiness sense of business services, what you wind up with is an approach on the business sideitself to use that as a lever to go out and directly be able to add in efficiencies, attack newmarkets, and really focus on some things on the business side that were latent, because there wasa feeling that it couldnt be delivered efficiently by IT or may not work.Seeing it workWere really seeing that lever work. Its right there. Were also seeing a focus on a broaderpicture. I want to make one point following up on what Paul Fremantle was saying earlier. Wereally need to have, and this is what this client has done, a reference architecture that is sort ofthe antithesis of cloud in a box.Its structured so that you don’t get tied into one particular vendors view of cloud or anythingelse. You’ve really taken an Architecture 101 approach. You build a reference model, you build areference architecture, you go execute against that, and you don’t have either an inheritance fromthe IaaS guys up into the higher parts of the stack or the sprawl from the existing platformplayers down into the infrastructure space.
    • Ultimately, and this is how this client views it, cloud is more than a way of thinking. It’s openand it’s about getting your house in order, but it’s also about not being locked in and trying to, inthe case where we feel like we should, turn the table on our existing vendors.And that’s what WSO2 is doing in terms of a feature-driven lean middleware and also the waythat they are approaching delivery in terms of a professional open-source model, and is verymuch in keeping with the way that my clients view the cloud.Gardner: Paul Fremantle, we only have time for one additional example. Do you have somecustomers that youve been working with that are perhaps what you would consider a bellwetherfor where the rest of the enterprises are likely to go?Fremantle: I want to put a different spin on this, which is that as well as the companies that aredoing what Paul OConnor was talking about and using PaaS to create the software factoryconcept within their organization, there is another angle on this, which is interesting. Its theability of people, not just software vendors, but also system integrators and even serviceproviders, to start using PaaS to create their own cloud software as a service (SaaS).This was brought to mind to me by one European-based system integrator and business processoutsourcer. Unfortunately, I can’t name them, but theyre a partner of ours. What theyve startedto do is think, "When Im building an application or a process for customer, is that something thatis really applicable just to this one customer or is it something that is a reusable asset, that can beoffered as a service to multiple customers?"Of course, that may not be offered over the public cloud. It may be hosted in a private cloud anddifferent companies give a VPN access to their own tenant within that. It’s something Im seeinga lot of software companies looking at as well, which is to start converting their applications intoSaaS.And as you do that, you quickly find that the things you need, the capabilities that you need, inorder to offer SaaS are the same capabilities that you need in a platform. Theyre the things I wastalking about before, things like identity, governance, metadata, monitoring and metering billing.To me, the interesting thing here is the intersection between how large enterprises are treatingtheir software development and how software companies are treating their softwaredevelopment, and system integrators and business process outsourcers are treating their softwaredevelopment. Theyre all converging on the most efficient model that we have come up with yet.Gardner: Very interesting. It sounds as if the IT ecosystem is marching in tandem towards thesame vision, and that will perhaps enable these enterprises to move all the more quickly, ratherthan the enterprises doing it essentially on their own.Fremantle: Absolutely.
    • Gardner: Well, very good. Im afraid were about out of time. Weve been discussing howworkload assembly and the concept of a business service factory are important attributes toprivate clouds, and how private clouds when established using these best practices andprinciples, can provide a huge stepping stone in the right direction for the future of IT, atransformed future of IT.I want to thank our panelists. Weve been joined by Paul Fremantle, the UK-based ChiefTechnology Officer and co-founder of WSO2. Thanks so much, Paul.Fremantle: Thank you very much.Gardner: And, we’ve also been joined by Paul O’Connor, the Chief Technology Officer atANATAS International in Sydney, Australia. Thanks for joining as well, Paul.OConnor: Thanks, Dana.Gardner: This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Youve been listeningto a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast. Thanks for listening, and come back next time.Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Sponsor:WSO2Transcript of a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast on modernizing IT to become business servicefactories. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2011. All rights reserved.You may also be interested in: • Cloud Computings Ultimate Value Depends on Open PaaS Models to Avoid Applications and Data Lock-In • Open Source and Cloud: A Curse of Blessing During Recession? BriefingsDirect Analysts Weigh In • WSO2 Data Services Provide Catalyst for SOA and Set Stage for New Cloud-Based Data Models