Earlier this year X/Open Co Ltd put out a request for proposals for a set of distributed management specifications. But it got no acceptable responses, and closed the thing during the summer. As part of its open process, X/Open members can propose a submission for consideration as a possible standard whenever they like. Tivoli Systems […]
Earlier this year X/Open Co Ltd put out a request for proposals for a set of distributed management specifications. But it got no acceptable responses, and closed the thing during the summer. As part of its open process, X/Open members can propose a submission for consideration as a possible standard whenever they like. Tivoli Systems Inc, Austin, Texas has been working on a proposal based on the not-yet-available TME 2.0 framework since March, and handed it to X/Open on November 5, just a few weeks shy of X/Open’s systems management meeting last week. Technology outlined in a NetLabs Inc proposal received at around the same time was deemed not directly applicable to what X/Open had in mind for distributed management, but was passed on to another X/Open working group for closer examination. Meanwhile, the Common Open Software Environment fraternity gets itself off the ground and sees the sense in working hand-in-hand with X/Open to find an acceptable solution to the difficult problem. X/Open’s systems management working group met last week to consider the Tivoli proposal. After some wrangling over detail, it eventually decided that the proposal warranted an electronic mail vote that will happen on January 8. This vote will decide whether the Tivoli submission, a 200-odd page tome that draws heavily on the Object Management Group’s Common Object Request Broker Architecture 1.1 specification, should be considered in more detail and eventually go forward to the relevant X/Open committee to be evaluated as a full X/Open specification standard. After evaluation of the spec – and that includes Tivoli making all the changes recommended by the committee – then, and only then, would it go before the X/Open membership for ratification or rejection (though, in practice, X/Open would be unlikely to invest all its time and resources on developing a specification that wasn’t likely to get the nod from members). Given that there is a host of players lining up with their own object-based systems management – Hewlett-Packard Co, IBM Corp, Digital Equipment Corp Microsoft OpenVision, the Open Software Foundation and Sun Microsystems – Tivoli won’t have the field all to itself much longer. DEC and OpenVision have already said that they will make a submission, others are sure to follow. However, whether X/Open will make another stab at a request for proposals remains to be seen. It is not in the business of creating or defining technology, rather it aims to standardise on technologies proven in the market, whether they are specifications for interfaces or specifications for a broadly accepted implementation. Insiders say the various technologies first need to be proven in the market in any case, and that firms are already working with users and organisations on finding a process that embraces CORBA, X/Open and interoperability between different offerings. So, we are more likely to see some kind of unified framework that will eventually be offered up as a proposal. Watch the cross-licensing deals.