Output Break-out Session # 4 CLOUD SLA © ETSI All rights reserved CLOUD STANDARDS COORDINATION Cannes, 4-5 december 2012

Session Cloud SLA Title session: Cloud SLA Reported by: Bernd Becker (EuroCloud) Co-facilitators: Jamil Chawki (Orange) and Bill Semper (TMF) Number participants: 45 Misc: 4 Feedbacks ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 2

Functional scope Describe the functional area of SLA SLA Definition : A Service Level Agreement (SLA) is a documented agreement between the service provider and customer that identifies services and service targets. [ISO/IEC :2011]. Specific on cloud issues The scope of this session is to catalogue standards organizations and specifications – existing as well as missing - that may be relevant to SLAs that apply to the whole service/supply chain of Cloud. collect key issues and new ideas relevant to SLAs for Cloud. Issue 1: Stakeholders and their responsibility. Issue 2: Handling of e.g. QoS, KPI and KQI in addition to security, privacy aspects relevant for SLA fulfillment. Others…. Feedback: SLAs: How can SLAs be constructed similar to Application Service Provider Models

Session Schedule Scope (SLA activity)45 min +15 min Use cases & Requirements 45 min +15 min Organization/SDO delivering technical specifications/Standards45 min ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 4

SLA  Scope (1) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 5

SLA  Scope (2) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 6

SLA  Scope (3) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 7

SLA  Usecase and Requirements ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 8

SLA  Organization/SDO delivering technical specifications/Standards Organizations /SDO delivering technical specifications and/or standards TMF ISO/ IEC JTC1 SC38 and SC27 NIST ITU-T ETSI OGF Suggestions on relevant standards ISO/IEC JTC1CS7: series ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC-38: Report on SLA& Service delivery TM Forum : TR178 Enabling End-to-End Cloud SLA Management, GB917, MultiCloud Accelerator Pack NIST: Cloud Contracts and SLAs ETSI TC Cloud: Draft ETSI DTR/CLOUD-0012 V0.0.4 Cloud Standards Customer Council: Practical Guide to Cloud Service Level Agreements ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 9

SLA  Organization/SDO delivering technical specifications/Standards ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 10

SLA  Scope (2) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 11

Who does what in this space? Organizations delivering technical specifications and/or standards Note that there may not be a matching Technical Specifications/Standards organisation or forum for each area. Suggestions on relevant standards (Time permitting) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 12

Session xxx Title session Reported by (name rapporteur) Co-facilitators Number participants Misc (if relevant) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 13

Functional scope Describe the functional area of (subject xxx)

Use cases/requirements Key questions that need to be addressed (bearing in mind the EU landscape and market) “What do people need?" Requirements/use cases Suggested priorities ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 15

Who does what in this space? Organizations delivering technical specifications and/or standards Note that there may not be a matching Technical Specifications/Standards organisation or forum for each area. Suggestions on relevant standards (Time permitting) ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 16

Use cases/requirements Use cases Framework for classifications: Simple or composite Cloud services Low / high critical services and Data ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 17

Use cases/framework 18 IMPORTANCE Relevance of service and/or sensitivity of data LOW HIGH COMPLEXITY OF SERVICE LOW HIGH UC Type 2 UC Type 1 UC Type 3 UC Type 4 IAAS e.g. Storage Archiving of Accounting Logfiles IAAS e.g. Processing non critical Insurance Data SAAS e.g. Drivers log T&E Mang. SAAS e.g. Financial Reporting Patient Records

Use cases/requirements Required Areas of standardization with respect to SLAs Stakeholders and their responsibility SLA terminology Ecosystem, including roles and sub-roles and responsibilities High level business/use and functional architecture views Handling of e.g. QoS, KPI and KQI in addition to security, privacy aspects relevant for SLA fulfillment.. ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 19

Who does what in this space? Organizations /SDO delivering technical specifications and/or standards TMF ISO/ IEC JTC1 SC38 and SC27 NIST ITU-T ETSI OGF Suggestions on relevant standards ISO/IEC JTC1CS7: series ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC-38: Report on SLA& Service delivery TM Forum : TR178 Enabling End-to-End Cloud SLA Management, NIST: Cloud Contracts and SLAs ETSI TC Cloud: Draft ETSI DTR/CLOUD-0012 V0.0.4 Cloud Standards Customer Council: Practical Guide to Cloud Service Level Agreements ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 20

Feedbacks ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 21

Feedback from ALU on issue 2 Provisioning of E2E cloud services quality(QoS): define a conceptual model define/describe service impairments & SLA/QoS characteristics(e.g. availability, performance,... ) that arise along the end-to-end path from the cloud consumer’s application running on some cloud service providers’ infrastructure define a set of SLA Parameters appropriate to the specific service types and characteristics identified (e.g. response time) defining and standardisation of SLA Metrics (e.g. delay) to allow the unambiguous evaluation of SLA Parameters and service quality across key interfaces in the service delivery chain ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 22

Feedback from Microsoft (1) The IS IEC of the SLA includes the 2 following note: NOTE 1: A service level agreement can also be established between the service provider and a supplier, an internal group or a customer acting as a supplier. NOTE 2: A service level agreement can be included in a contract or another type of documented agreement These notes should be re-introduced in the scope to give an accurate definition, especially the note 2, because it clearly states that a SLA is a part of a contract. A SLA is not a contract and shall not be confused with a contract Issue 3 named ”others” is too generic and doesn’t add value, especially because the sentence above includes already the idea that the activity will not be “limited” to the issues listed The statement about the link between the SLAs and “the legislation, regulation and other matters outside the scope of standardization” is extremely important and shall be always carefully considered. ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 23

Feedback from Microsoft (2) A SLA cannot replace a contract or agreement – it can just assist in entering into a contract or agreement A SLA cannot supersede or contradict relevant law (consumer law, contract law, …); so work on SLA standards has to be delicate and must avoid dealing with issues that are covered by higher authorities Legacy outsourcing thinking cannot be applied to Cloud Computing. The multi-tenant, very large scale nature of public cloud services creates nuanced issues across many terms and conditions in traditional IT agreements and SLAs In practice, for cloud computing, a SLA is mainly constituted of “service targets”, also identified in the scope as KPI and KQI“ In support of “self service, on demand” the KPI and KQI should, as far as possible, be machine readable and suitable for automatic interpretation by software Where human intervention is required to evaluate or negotiate an SLA, this should be confined to the aspects which are not suitable for automation only SLAs need to be suitable for international use The standard SLA format cannot be tied to any specific cloud platform, operating system, middleware or application. Rather, the standard SLA should be flexible for all. The standard SLA format must not preclude innovation in the cloud ecosystem. For example, it should not assume or require specific solutions, protocols, or parameters that may become obsolete as the ecosystem evolves over time. ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 24

Feedback from Ministry of the Interior The Netherlands I think it is important to stress that, as stated in the recently released opinion of the EDPS(*), cloud computing should not be treated any different from the way conventional data processing operations are being treated regarding aspects concerning SLAs. What we do need to discuss is how cloud computing can be configured - among others in terms of the way services are being delivered and contractual terms & conditions can be described and enforced - in such a way that it can comply to the current standards in the field of data processing. The challenge is to do this in such a way that it supports the realization of the recently published European cloud strategy. ETSI/BOARD(12)89_0XX 25