[cgl_discussion] PoC Review of CGL 2.0 Registration Requirements

Lynch, Rusty rusty.lynch at intel.com
Tue Jun 24 23:06:04 PDT 2003


The latest CGL 2.0 Registration Requirements are available for PoC Team (or anyone else) review at:
 
http://www.osdl.org/docs/cgl_registration_requirements_ms_word.doc
http://www.osdl.org/docs/cgl_registration_requirements_pdf.pdf
 
>From the Executive Summary:

The OSDL Carrier Grade Linux (CGL) Working Group has attempted to tackle the extremely hard job of defining what the requirements are for a Linux distribution suitable for a carrier grade environment.  The nature of these requirements result in a complex matrix of external specification references (POSIX, SAF HPI ...), general behavior requirements (soft real-time), and forward looking requirements that provide enough information to guide implementers but leave lots of room for the market to decide on specifics like an API (resource management.)

As with any type of requirements document or specification, eventually an end customer is going to ask for a way to tell if a given product conforms to the related requirements document or specification.  This type of proof is traditionally done with a formal certification process via a formal certification authority.  Even with a simple API specification, formal certification is a complex and expensive process (both to create the process and to run the process).  Given the complex nature of the OSDL CGL requirements, a formal certification is not realistic.

This has caused the OSDL Certification Team to rethink what is really important to end customers that are trying to build carrier grade solutions on Linux, and distribution vendors that are trying to provide a Linux operating system for end customers.

Some notable facts:
* Unlike other markets, people building carrier grade solutions are technical, and would never trust any certification mark at face value.  For example all Network Equipment Providers that have provided feedback to the working group will run any Linux distribution through their own battery of test before daring to deploy solutions built on top of the distribution.
* Given some of the forward looking requirements, it can be difficult for an end customer to determine which package in a distribution provides the requirement if the distribution vendor does not explicitly explain how the requirement is implemented.
* End customers have expressed a desire to the OSDL Certification Team to be able to verify the requirements are really packaged with the distribution.  In other words, a simple statement of compliance (or intent of being compliant) is not very helpful.

As a result of this, the concept of a "Registration" was born to provide:
* Linux distribution vendors with a way of identifying their product as conforming with the OSDL CGL requirements document
* Information to a customer which show how the requirements are implemented, the objective, and proof that the implementation is packaged within the product.

    --rustyl








More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list