Search Results

Search found 57 results on 3 pages for 'trond arne undheim'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • Bridged VM guest does not get IPv6 prefix

    - by Arne
    I have a similar problem and setup as described in IPv6 does not work over bridge. My host get a IPv6 prefix but the guest VM only gets a local fe80-prefix. Using tcpdump I can see that solicit messages are going out from the guest but the host (ubuntu-server) doesn't seem to respond: [email protected]:/var/log$ sudo tcpdump -i br0 host fe80::5054:00ff:fe4d:9ae0 tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on br0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 14:31:15.314419 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0 > ff02::16: HBH ICMP6, multicast listener report v2, 4 group record(s), length 88 14:31:15.322337 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0 > ff02::16: HBH ICMP6, multicast listener report v2, 1 group record(s), length 28 14:31:15.502374 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0 > ff02::16: HBH ICMP6, multicast listener report v2, 1 group record(s), length 28 14:31:15.743894 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0.dhcpv6-client > ff02::1:2.dhcpv6-server: dhcp6 solicit 14:31:15.802389 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0 > ff02::16: HBH ICMP6, multicast listener report v2, 4 group record(s), length 88 14:31:17.906580 IP6 fe80::5054:ff:fe4d:9ae0.dhcpv6-client > ff02::1:2.dhcpv6-server: dhcp6 solicit I had a firewall issue which I fixed by adding the following (copied from similar IPv4 before.rules settings) to /etc/ufw/before6.rules at the end before the commit statement: # allow bridging (for KVM) -I FORWARD -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT I am running the host on a Ubuntu 14.04 server so I guess I could have used dnsmasq but I didn't find any howto for it so I used radvd (which had to be installed) with the following configuration in /etc/radvd.conf: interface br0 { AdvSendAdvert on; AdvLinkMTU 1480; prefix 2a01:79d:xxx::/64 { AdvOnLink on; AdvAutonomous on; }; }; This didn't help though so I guess I must have configured it wrong? Any help appreciated. Br, Arne PS: I wish the Ubuntu documentation included how to configure virtualization to work with IPv6

    Read the article

  • EU Research for ICT - Call 7 - biggest ever at € 780 million

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Under the Digital Agenda for Europe, the Commission has committed to maintaining the pace of a 20% yearly increase of the annual ICT R&D budget at least until 2013. The EU's flagship policy programme calls for doubling of annual public spending on ICT R&D by 2020 and to leverage an equivalent increase in private spending to achieve the goals of Europe's 2020 strategy for jobs and growth. Call 7 is one of the biggest calls ever launched for information and communications technology (ICT) research proposals under the EU's research framework programmes. It will result in project funding of € 780 million in 2011. This funding will advance research on the future internet, robotics, smart and embedded systems, photonics, ICT for energy efficiency, health and well-being in an ageing society, and more. The €780 million call for proposals is part of the biggest ever annual Work Programme under the EU's 7th Framework Programme for Research. Almost €1.2 billion has been budgeted for 2011. €220 million were made available already in July 2010 for public private partnerships focusing on ICT for smart cars, green buildings, sustainable factories and the future internet. Universities, research centres, SMEs, large companies and other organisations in Europe and beyond are eligible to apply for project funding under ICT Call 7. Proposals can be submitted until 18 January 2011, after which they will be evaluated by independent panels of experts for selection on the basis of their quality. Background: Digital Agenda: European Commission announces €780 million boost for strategic ICT research. Call text: ICT Call 7 Deadline: 18/01/2011.

    Read the article

  • MySQL 5.5

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    New performance and scalability enhancements, continued Investment in MySQL (see press release). "The latest release of MySQL further exemplifies Oracle's commitment to the MySQL community and investment in delivering rapid innovation and enhancements to the MySQL platform" said Edward Screven, Oracle's Chief Corporate Architect. MySQL is integral to Oracle's complete, open and integrated strategy. The MySQL 5.5 Community Edition, which is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), and is available for free download, includes InnoDB as the default storage engine. We cannot stress the importance of using open standards enough, whether in the context of open source or non-open source software. For more on Oracle's Open Source offering, see Oracle.com/opensource or oss.oracle.com (for developers).

    Read the article

  • Open Source Survey: Oracle Products on Top

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Oracle continues to work with the open source community to bring the most innovative and productive software to market (more). Oracle products received the most votes in several key categories of the 2010 Linux Journal Reader's Choice Awards. With over 12,000 technologists reporting, these product earned top spots: Best Office Suite: OpenOffice.org Best Single Office Program: OpenOffice.org Writer Best Database: MySQL Best Virtualization Solution: VirtualBox "As the leading open source technology and service provider, Oracle continues to work with the community stakeholders to rapidly innovate many open source products for use in fully tested production environments," says Edward Screven, Oracle's chief corporate architect. "Supporting open source is important to Oracle and our customers, and we continue to invest in it." According to a recent report by the Linux Foundation, Oracle is one of the top ten contributors to the Linux Kernel. Oracle also contributes millions of lines of code to these important projects: OpenJDK: 7,002,579 Eclipse: 1,800,000 (#3 in active committers) MySQL: 5,073,113 NetBeans: 7,870,446 JSF: 701,980 Apache MyFaces Trinidad: 1,316,840 Hudson: 1,209,779 OpenOffice.org: 7,500,000

    Read the article

  • Oracle Cloud Office and Oracle Open Office 3.3

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Industry's First Complete, Open Standards-Based Office Productivity Suites for Desktop, Web and Mobile Users were launched today, 15 December 2010 (press release). Based on the Open Document Format (ODF) and open web standards, Oracle Open Office enables users to share files on any system as it is compatible with both legacy Microsoft Office documents and de facto formats, Portable Document Format (PDF), and modern web 2.0 publishing. Oracle Cloud Office is the foundation of the open standard office stack based on the open document format (ODF), and has powerful social sharing capability, ubiquitous document authoring and collaboration. Together, the two solutions enable cross-company, enterprise class collaboration with true interoperability, including the flexibility to support users across a wide variety of devices and platforms.

    Read the article

  • European Interoperability Framework - a new beginning?

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    The most controversial document in the history of the European Commission's IT policy is out. EIF is here, wrapped in the Communication "Towards interoperability for European public services", and including the new feature European Interoperability Strategy (EIS), arguably a higher strategic take on the same topic. Leaving EIS aside for a moment, the EIF controversy has been around IPR, defining open standards and about the proper terminology around standardization deliverables. Today, as the document finally emerges, what is the verdict? First of all, to be fair to those among you who do not spend your lives in the intricate labyrinths of Commission IT policy documents on interoperability, let's define what we are talking about. According to the Communication: "An interoperability framework is an agreed approach to interoperability for organisations that want to collaborate to provide joint delivery of public services. Within its scope of applicability, it specifies common elements such as vocabulary, concepts, principles, policies, guidelines, recommendations, standards, specifications and practices." The Good - EIF reconfirms that "The Digital Agenda can only take off if interoperability based on standards and open platforms is ensured" and also confirms that "The positive effect of open specifications is also demonstrated by the Internet ecosystem." - EIF takes a productive and pragmatic stance on openness: "In the context of the EIF, openness is the willingness of persons, organisations or other members of a community of interest to share knowledge and stimulate debate within that community, the ultimate goal being to advance knowledge and the use of this knowledge to solve problems" (p.11). "If the openness principle is applied in full: - All stakeholders have the same possibility of contributing to the development of the specification and public review is part of the decision-making process; - The specification is available for everybody to study; - Intellectual property rights related to the specification are licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software" (p. 26). - EIF is a formal Commission document. The former EIF 1.0 was a semi-formal deliverable from the PEGSCO, a working group of Member State representatives. - EIF tackles interoperability head-on and takes a clear stance: "Recommendation 22. When establishing European public services, public administrations should prefer open specifications, taking due account of the coverage of functional needs, maturity and market support." - The Commission will continue to support the National Interoperability Framework Observatory (NIFO), reconfirming the importance of coordinating such approaches across borders. - The Commission will align its internal interoperability strategy with the EIS through the eCommission initiative. - One cannot stress the importance of using open standards enough, whether in the context of open source or non-open source software. The EIF seems to have picked up on this fact: What does the EIF says about the relation between open specifications and open source software? The EIF introduces, as one of the characteristics of an open specification, the requirement that IPRs related to the specification have to be licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software. In this way, companies working under various business models can compete on an equal footing when providing solutions to public administrations while administrations that implement the standard in their own software (software that they own) can share such software with others under an open source licence if they so decide. - EIF is now among the center pieces of the Digital Agenda (even though this demands extensive inter-agency coordination in the Commission): "The EIS and the EIF will be maintained under the ISA Programme and kept in line with the results of other relevant Digital Agenda actions on interoperability and standards such as the ones on the reform of rules on implementation of ICT standards in Europe to allow use of certain ICT fora and consortia standards, on issuing guidelines on essential intellectual property rights and licensing conditions in standard-setting, including for ex-ante disclosure, and on providing guidance on the link between ICT standardisation and public procurement to help public authorities to use standards to promote efficiency and reduce lock-in.(Communication, p.7)" All in all, quite a few good things have happened to the document in the two years it has been on the shelf or was being re-written, depending on your perspective, in any case, awaiting the storms to calm. The Bad - While a certain pragmatism is required, and governments cannot migrate to full openness overnight, EIF gives a bit too much room for governments not to apply the openness principle in full. Plenty of reasons are given, which should maybe have been put as challenges to be overcome: "However, public administrations may decide to use less open specifications, if open specifications do not exist or do not meet functional interoperability needs. In all cases, specifications should be mature and sufficiently supported by the market, except if used in the context of creating innovative solutions". - EIF does not use the internationally established terminology: open standards. Rather, the EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification". How do "formalised specifications" relate to "standards"? According to the FAQ provided: The word "standard" has a specific meaning in Europe as defined by Directive 98/34/EC. Only technical specifications approved by a recognised standardisation body can be called a standard. Many ICT systems rely on the use of specifications developed by other organisations such as a forum or consortium. The EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification", which is either a standard pursuant to Directive 98/34/EC or a specification established by ICT fora and consortia. The term "open specification" used in the EIF, on the one hand, avoids terminological confusion with the Directive and, on the other, states the main features that comply with the basic principle of openness laid down in the EIF for European Public Services. Well, this may be somewhat true, but in reality, Europe is 30 year behind in terminology. Unless the European Standardization Reform gets completed in the next few months, most Member States will likely conclude that they will go on referencing and using standards beyond those created by the three European endorsed monopolists of standardization, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. Who can afford to begin following the strict Brussels rules for what they can call open standards when, in reality, standards stemming from global standardization organizations, so-called fora/consortia, dominate in the IT industry. What exactly is EIF saying? Does it encourage Member States to go on using non-ESO standards as long as they call it something else? I guess I am all for it, although it is a bit cumbersome, no? Why was there so much interest around the EIF? The FAQ attempts to explain: Some Member States have begun to adopt policies to achieve interoperability for their public services. These actions have had a significant impact on the ecosystem built around the provision of such services, e.g. providers of ICT goods and services, standardisation bodies, industry fora and consortia, etc... The Commission identified a clear need for action at European level to ensure that actions by individual Member States would not create new electronic barriers that would hinder the development of interoperable European public services. As a result, all stakeholders involved in the delivery of electronic public services in Europe have expressed their opinions on how to increase interoperability for public services provided by the different public administrations in Europe. Well, it does not take two years to read 50 consultation documents, and the EU Standardization Reform is not yet completed, so, more pragmatically, you finally had to release the document. Ok, let's leave some of that aside because the document is out and some people are happy (and others definitely not). The Verdict Considering the controversy, the delays, the lobbying, and the interests at stake both in the EU, in Member States and among vendors large and small, this document is pretty impressive. As with a good wine that has not yet come to full maturity, let's say that it seems to be coming in in the 85-88/100 range, but only a more fine-grained analysis, enjoyment in good company, and ultimately, implementation, will tell. The European Commission has today adopted a significant interoperability initiative to encourage public administrations across the EU to maximise the social and economic potential of information and communication technologies. Today, we should rally around this achievement. Tomorrow, let's sit down and figure out what it means for the future.

    Read the article

  • European e-government Action Plan all about interoperability

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Yesterday, the European Commission released its European eGovernment Action Plan for 2011-2015. The plan includes measures on providing deeper user empowerment, enhancing the Internal Market, more efficiency and effectiveness of public administrations, and putting in place pre-conditions for developing e-government. The Good - Defines interoperability very clearly. Calls interoperability "a pre-condition for cross-border eGovernment services" (a very strong formulation) and says interoperability "is supported by open specifications". - Uses the terminology "open specifications" which, let's face it, is pretty close to "open standards" which is the term the rest of the world would use. - Confirms that Member States are fully committed to the political priorities of the Malmö Declaration (which was all about open standards) including the very strong action: by 2013: All Member States will have incorporated the political priorities of the Malmö Declaration in their national strategies. Such tight Action Plan integration between Commission and Member State priorities has seldom been attempted before, particularly not in a field where European legal competence is virtually non-existent. What we see now, is the subtle force of soft power rather than the rough force of regulation. In this case, it is the Member States who want Europe to take the lead. Very refreshing! Some quotes that show the commitment to interoperability and open specifications: "The emergence of innovative technologies such as "service-oriented architectures" (SOA), or "clouds" of services,  together with more open specifications which allow for greater sharing, re-use and interoperability reinforce the ability of ICT to play a key role in this quest for effficiency in the public sector." (p.4) "Interoperability is supported through open specifications" (p.13) 2.4.1. Open Specifications and Interoperability (p.13 has a whole section dedicated to this important topic. Open specifications and interoperability are nearly 100% interrelated): "Interoperability is the ability of systems and machines to exchange, process and correctly interpret information. It is more than just a technical challenge, as it also involves legal, organisational and semantic aspects of handling  data" (p.13) "standards and  open platforms offer opportunities for more cost-effective use of resources and delivery of services" (p.13). The Bad Shies away from defining open standards, or even open specifications, the EU's preferred term for the key enabler of interoperability. Verdict 90/100, a very respectable score.

    Read the article

  • Java EE Summit December 3rd-5th Cologne, Germany

    - by JuergenKress
    16 Java EE Workshops in 3 days: Track: Java EE Core Technologies · Core – JPA 2.x - Arne Limburg · Core – EJB 3.1 und 3.2 - Jens Schumann · Core – CDI 1.0 & 1.1 - Mark Struberg · Core – JSF 2.x - Lars Röwekamp Track: Best Practices · Pitfalls in Java EE - Mark Struberg · Java EE UI - Adam Bien · Modeling meets Code - Arne Limburg · Java EE Security - Adam Bien Track: Java EE Kickstart · Kickstart – Java-EE-Architekturen - Jens Schumann · Kickstart – Java Web Profile - Lars Röwekamp · Kickstart – Events und Messaging - Thilo Frotscher · Kickstart – Services: REST und WS-* Thilo Frotscher “Do it yourself” – Workshop Day · Java EE Core – Putting together - Jens Schumann, Lars Röwekamp · Java EE Core – Putting together: Extended Edition · Java EE 6/7 – Productivity with Joy: Development - Adam Bien · Java EE 6/7 – Productivity with Joy: Testing - Adam Bien >> Night Session mit Matthias Weßendorf: · Future: New School Web Apps For more information and registration please visit www.java-ee-summit.de/zeitplaner. WebLogic Partner Community For regular information become a member in the WebLogic Partner Community please visit: http://www.oracle.com/partners/goto/wls-emea ( OPN account required). If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. BlogTwitterLinkedInMixForumWiki Technorati Tags: Java EE,Adam Bien,Java EE Summit,WebLogic Community,Oracle,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • EU Digital Agenda scores 85/100

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    If the Digital Agenda was a bottle of wine and I were wine critic Robert Parker, I would say the Digital Agenda has "a great bouquet, many good elements, with astringent, dry and puckering mouth feel that will not please everyone, but still displaying some finesse. A somewhat controlled effort with no surprises and a few noticeable flaws in the delivery. Noticeably shorter aftertaste than advertised by the producers. Score: 85/100. Enjoy now". The EU Digital Agenda states that "standards are vital for interoperability" and has a whole chapter on interoperability and standards. With this strong emphasis, there is hope the EU's outdated standardization system finally is headed for reform. It has been 23 years since the legal framework of standardisation was completed by Council Decision 87/95/EEC8 in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) sector. Standardization is market driven. For several decades the IT industry has been developing standards and specifications in global open standards development organisations (fora/consortia), many of which have transparency procedures and practices far superior to the European Standards Organizations. The Digital Agenda rightly states: "reflecting the rise and growing importance of ICT standards developed by certain global fora and consortia". Some fora/consortia, of course, are distorted, influenced by single vendors, have poor track record, and need constant vigilance, but they are the minority. Therefore, the recognition needs to be accompanied by eligibility criteria focused on openness. Will the EU reform its ICT standardization by the end of 2010? Possibly, and only if DG Enterprise takes on board that Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) have driven half of the productivity growth in Europe over the past 15 years, a prominent fact in the EU's excellent Digital Competitiveness report 2010 published on Monday 17 May. It is ok to single out the ICT sector. It simply is the most important sector right now as it fuels growth in all other sectors. Let's not wait for the entire standardization package which may take another few years. Europe does not have time. The Digital Agenda is an umbrella strategy with deliveries from a host of actors across the Commission. For instance, the EU promises to issue "guidance on transparent ex-ante disclosure rules for essential intellectual property rights and licensing terms and conditions in the context of standard setting", by 2011 in the Horisontal Guidelines now out for public consultation by DG COMP and to some extent by DG ENTR's standardization policy reform. This is important. The EU will issue procurement guidance as interoperability frameworks are put into practice. This is a joint responsibility of several DGs, and is likely to suffer coordination problems, controversy and delays. We have seen plenty of the latter already and I have commented on the Commission's own interoperability elsewhere, with mixed luck. :( Yesterday, I watched the cartoonesque Korean western film The Good, the Bad and the Weird. In the movie (and I meant in the movie only), a bandit, a thief, and a bounty hunter, all excellent at whatever they do, fight for a treasure map. Whether that is a good analogy for the situation within the Commission, others are better judges of than I. However, as a movie fanatic, I still await the final shoot-out, and, as in the film, the only certainty is that "life is about chasing and being chased". The missed opportunity (in this case not following up the push from Member States to better define open standards based interoperability) is a casualty of the chaos ensued in the European Wild West (and I mean that in the most endearing sense, and my excuses beforehand to actors who possibly justifiably cannot bear being compared to fictional movie characters). Instead of exposing the ongoing fight, the EU opted for the legalistic use of the term "standards" throughout the document. This is a term that--to the EU-- excludes most standards used by the IT industry world wide. So, while it, for a moment, meant "weapon down", it will not lead to lasting peace. The Digital Agenda calls for the Member States to "Implement commitments on interoperability and standards in the Malmö and Granada Declarations by 2013". This is a far cry from the actual Ministerial Declarations which called upon the Commission to help them with this implementation by recognizing and further defining open standards based interoperability. Unless there is more forthcoming from the Commission, the market's judgement will be: you simply fall short. Generally, I think the EU focus now should be "from policy to practice" and the Digital Agenda does indeed stop short of tackling some highly practical issues. There is need for progress beyond the Digital Agenda. Here are some suggestions that would help Europe re-take global leadership on openness, public sector reform, and economic growth: A strong European software strategy centred around open standards based interoperability by 2011. An ambitious new eCommission strategy for 2011-15 focused on migration to open standards by 2015. Aligning the IT portfolio across the Commission into one Digital Agenda DG by 2012. Focusing all best practice exchange in eGovernment on one social networking site, epractice.eu (full disclosure: I had a role in getting that site up and running) Prioritizing public sector needs in global standardization over European standardization by 2014.

    Read the article

  • Is Openness at the heart of the EU Digital Agenda?

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    At OpenForum Europe Summit 2010, to be held in Brussels, Autoworld, 11 Parc du Cinquantenaire on Thursday 10 June 2010, a number of global speakers will discuss whether it indeed provides an open digital market as a catalyst for economic growth and if it will deliver a truly open e-government and digital citizenship (see Summit 2010). In 2008, OpenForum Europe, a not-for-profit champion of openness through open standards, hosted one of the most cited speeches by Neelie Kroes, then Commissioner of Competition. Her forward-looking speech on openness and interoperability as a way to improve the competitiveness of ICT markets set the EU on a path to eradicate lock-in forever. On the two-year anniversary of that event, Vice President Kroes, now the first-ever Commissioner of the Digital Agenda, is set to outline her plans for delivering on that vision. Much excitement surrounds open standards, given that Kroes is a staunch believer. The EU's Digital Agenda promises IT standardization reform in Europe and vows to recognize global standards development organizations (fora/consortia) by 2010. However, she avoided the term "open standards" in her new strategy. Markets are, of course, asking why she is keeping her cards tight on this crucial issue. Following her speech, Professor Yochai Benkler, award-winning author of "The Wealth of Networks", and Professor Nigel Shadbolt, appointed by the UK Government to work alongside Sir Tim Berners-Lee to help transform public access to UK Government information join dozens of speakers in the quest to analyse, entertain and challenge European IT policy, people, and documents. Speakers at OFE Summit 2010 include David Drummond, Senior VP Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer, Google; Michael Karasick, VP Technology and Strategy, IBM; Don Deutsch, Vice President, Standards Strategy and Architecture for Oracle Corp; Thomas Vinje, Partner Clifford Chance; Jerry Fishenden, Director, Centre for Policy Research, and Rishab Ghosh, head, collaborative creativity group, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht (see speakers). Will openness stay at the heart of EU Digital Agenda? Only time will show.

    Read the article

  • CEN/CENELEC Lacks Perspective

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Over the last few months, two of the European Standardization Organizations (ESOs), CEN and CENELEC have circulated an unfortunate position statement distorting the facts around fora and consortia. For the benefit of outsiders to this debate, let's just say that this debate regards whether and how the EU should recognize standards and specifications from certain fora and consortia based on a process evaluating the openness and transparency of such deliverables. The topic is complex, and somewhat confusing even to insiders, but nevertheless crucial to the European economy. As far as I can judge, their positions are not based on facts. This is unfortunate. For the benefit of clarity, here are some of the observations they make: a)"Most consortia are in essence driven by technology companies making hardware and software solutions, by definition very few of the largest ones are European-based". b) "Most consortia lack a European presence, relevant Committees, even those that are often cited as having stronger links with Europe, seem to lack an overall, inclusive set of participants". c) "Recognising specific consortia specifications will not resolve any concrete problems of interoperability for public authorities; interoperability depends on stringing together a range of specifications (from formal global bodies or consortia alike)". d) "Consortia already have the option to have their specifications adopted by the international formal standards bodies and many more exercise this than the two that seem to be campaigning for European recognition. Such specifications can then also be adopted as European standards." e) "Consortium specifications completely lack any process to take due and balanced account of requirements at national level - this is not important for technologies but can be a critical issue when discussing cross-border issues within the EU such as eGovernment, eHealth and so on". f) "The proposed recognition will not lead to standstill on national or European activities, nor to the adoption of the specifications as national standards in the CEN and CENELEC members (usually in their official national languages), nor to withdrawal of conflicting national standards. A big asset of the European standardization system is its coherence and lack of fragmentation." g) "We always miss concrete and specific examples of where consortia referencing are supposed to be helpful." First of all, note that ETSI, the third ESO, did not join the position. The reason is, of course, that ETSI beyond being an ESO, also has a global perspective and, moreover, does consider reality. Secondly, having produced arguments a) to g), CEN/CENELEC has the audacity to call a meeting on Friday 25 February entitled "ICT standardization - improving collaboration in Europe". This sounds very nice, but they have not set the stage for constructive debate. Rather, they demonstrate a striking lack of vision and lack of perspective. I will back this up by three facts, and leave it there. 1. Since the 1980s, global industry fora and consortia, such as IETF, W3C and OASIS have emerged as world-leading ICT standards development organizations with excellent procedures for openness and transparency in all phases of standards development, ex post and ex ante. - Practically no ICT system can be built without using fora and consortia standards (FCS). - Without using FCS, neither the Internet, upon which the EU economy depends, nor EU institutions would operate. - FCS are of high relevance for achieving and promoting interoperability and driving innovation. 2. FCS are complementary to the formally recognized standards organizations including the ESOs. - No work will be taken away from the ESOs should the EU recognize certain FCS. - Each FCS would be evaluated on its merit and on the openness of the process that produced it. ESOs would, with other stakeholders, have a say. - ESOs could potentially educate and assist European stakeholders to engage more actively and constructively with FCS. - ETSI, also an ESO, seems to clearly recognize these facts. 3. Europe and its Member States have a strong voice in several of the most relevant global industry fora and consortia. - W3C: W3C was founded in 1994 by an Englishman, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, in collaboration with CERN, the European research lab. In April 1995, INRIA (Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique) in France became the first European W3C host and in 2003, ERCIM (European Research Consortium in Informatics and Mathematics), also based in France, took over the role of European W3C host from INRIA. Today, W3C has 326 Members, 40% of which are European. Government participation is also strong, and it could be increased - a development that is very much desired by W3C. Current members of the W3C Advisory Board includes Ora Lassila (Nokia) and Charles McCathie Nevile (Opera). Nokia is Finnish company, Opera is a Norwegian company. SAP's Claus von Riegen is an alumni of the same Advisory Board. - OASIS: its membership - 30% of which is European - represents the marketplace, reflecting a balance of providers, user companies, government agencies, and non-profit organizations. In particular, about 15% of OASIS members are governments or universities. Frederick Hirsch from Nokia, Claus von Riegen from SAP AG and Charles-H. Schulz from Ars Aperta are on the Board of Directors. Nokia is a Finnish company, SAP is a German company and Ars Aperta is a French company. The Chairman of the Board is Peter Brown, who is an Independent Consultant, an Austrian citizen AND an official of the European Parliament currently on long-term leave. - IETF: The oversight of its activities is by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), since 2007 chaired by Olaf Kolkman, a Dutch national who lives in Uithoorn, NL. Kolkman is director of NLnet Labs, a foundation chartered to develop open source software and open source standards for the Internet. Other IAB members include Marcelo Bagnulo whose affiliation is the University Carlos III of Madrid, Spain as well as Hannes Tschofenig from Nokia Siemens Networks. Nokia is a Finnish company. Siemens is a German company. Nokia Siemens is a European joint venture. - Member States: At least 17 European Member States have developed Interoperability Frameworks that include FCS, according to the EU-funded National Interoperability Framework Observatory (see list and NIFO web site on IDABC). This also means they actively procure solutions using FCS, reference FCS in their policies and even in laws. Member State reps are free to engage in FCS, and many do. It would be nice if the EU adjusted to this reality. - A huge number of European nationals work in the global IT industry, on European soil or elsewhere, whether in EU registered companies or not. CEN/CENELEC lacks perspective and has engaged in an effort to twist facts that is quite striking from a publicly funded organization. I wish them all possible success with Friday's meeting but I fear all of the most important stakeholders will not be at the table. Not because they do not wish to collaborate, but because they just have been insulted. If they do show up, it would be a gracious move, almost beyond comprehension. While I do not expect CEN/CENELEC to line up perfectly in favor of fora and consortia, I think it would be to their benefit to stick to more palatable observations. Actually, I would suggest an apology, straightening out the facts. This works among friends and it works in an organizational context. Then, we can all move on. Standardization is important. Too important to ignore. Too important to distort. The European economy depends on it. We need CEN/CENELEC. It is an important organization. But CEN/CENELEC needs fora and consortia, too.

    Read the article

  • Digital Agenda in the EU means open standards after all

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    European Commission Vice President Neelie Kroes speech on Openness at the heart of the EU Digital Agenda at Open Forum Europe 2010 Summit in Brussels refocuses the EU Digital Agenda on open standards. I say the speech scores a 90/100, smooth, smart, a little vicious at the fringes, maybe? Anyway, it shows the strategy might age and implement well. This is Dutch pragmatism at its best. The EU Digital Agenda (I give it an 85/100 score), while laudable, stops short of using the term. The next step for the European Commission is defining the term open standards. If they do that, and do it right, Vice President Kroes will go into history as having made a significant contribution towards global progress in e-government by possibly eradicating lock-in forever. Moreover, she will put Europe's SMEs in a better position to succeed in a global IT market filled with barriers to entry from players not fully understanding, using, or unpacking standards. Kroes' interesting suggestion that she will now explore a "legal proposal" on interoperability that will have an impact on all IT companies operating in the European market is more up for debate. An interoperability directive? One run by DG COMP or one run by DG INFSO, telecom style? Would something like that work? Would the industry like it? Would it help European governments? Possibly, if done right. The good thing was, Kroes pointed out that she will look for input from the industry. Kroes' track record is one of not being scared of taking on the Titans. She also wants to enact real, positive, lasting change. "I will not go anywhere", she said. All of that is good. And she does understand the importance of open standards. Let's now start discussing the details. Implementing the Digital Agenda is not simple. It requires collaboration across the various Directorates in the European Commission. Mounting a new Interoperability directive is also never attempted before. Getting it right is important. Even possibly finding out it cannot be done right and choosing a more light weight approach that is equally effective would be bold. Go Kroes!

    Read the article

  • how to automate upsizing from Access to SQL Server?

    - by Arne
    Hi, I need to automate the migration from an Access (2003) to an SQL Server DB (2005 or 2008). The upsizing should be done automatically as part of a build process. I need that because there are 2 versions of the software, a single user rich client and a web version. Access DB is used for single user to minimize setup effort, SQL Server to improve performance and scaling with many simultanious users. Access should be the "leading" DB, meaning devs do changes in Access DB and those are propagated to the SQL server within the build process. Many changes will occur, so doing it manually is not an option. I am new to the Microsoft world, so I dont know appropriate tools for that. What tools can I use and how? I know how to do it (by clicking) with the upsizing assistant. Perhaps I can automate that somehow? Thanks in advance for your answers. Cheers, Arne

    Read the article

  • links for 2010-06-03

    - by Bob Rhubart
    @rluttikhuizen: Fault handling in Oracle SOA Suite 11g "When it comes to technical faults," says  Oracle ACE Ronald van Luttikhuizen, "you probably do not want to design error handling in the process itself." (tags: soa oracleace oracle otn) Adrian Campbell: Enterprise Architecture and Zombies EA blogger Adrian Campbell invokes Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings, Black Adder, and "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" in this interpretation of Gartner's 10 EA pitfalls. (tags: entarch zombies gartner) Nathalie Roman: Oracle Forms -- alive and kicking Oracle ACE Director Nathalie Roman offers details on a recent Oracle Forms Modernization seminar.  (tags: oracle otn oracleace fusionmiddleware soa) Trond-Arne Undheim: Is Openness at the heart of the EU Digital Agenda? Trond-Arne Undheim shares some insight into the upcoming OpenForum Europe Summit 2010, to be held in Brussels. (tags: oracle otn entarch architect) Chris Raby: Oracle Financial Analytics Presentations and Photos Chris Raby shares details on Rittman Mead's series of seminars that combine the company's in-depth technical knowledge with a greater focus on the business perspective.  (tags: entarch bi architect oracle otn) June Oracle Technology Network NEW Member Benefits - books books and more books!!! Details on how OTN members can get discounts on books from APress, CRC, Pearson, and Packt Publishing.  (tags: oracle otn community books discounts) Manoj Neelapu: Oracle Service Bus + SOA in same server Manoj Neelapu's  tutorial covers on how to do create a domain in which SOA and Oracle Service Bus run in a single JVM . (tags: oracle otn soa architect)

    Read the article

  • Simple Scripting for your Exalogic Storage

    - by Trond Strømme
    As part of my job in Oracle ACS (Advanced Customer Services) I'm handling lots of different systems and customers. Among the recent systems I worked with have been Oracle's Exalogic engineered systems. One of the things I'd never had much exposure to as a system developer/architect/middleware guy/Java dude has been storage; outside of consuming it for my photography needs.. Well, I'm always ready for a new challenge... I'd downloaded the 7000 series storage simulator when it was released in the good old Sun days, found it fun and instructive to play around with, but as I never touched storage in any way (besides consuming it..) I forgot about it. A couple of years ago when I started working with Exalogic engineered systems it again came into light as an invaluable learning and testing tool for the embedded storage in an Exalogic;  Oracle's Sun ZFS Storage 7320 Appliance.  aaaanyway... I've been "booted" into a part-time role as the interim storage/system admin/middleware/Java guy for a client and found I needed to create the occasional report or summary or whatever.. of what's using the storage in the 7320 (as default configured for an Exalogic, 40T of disk in a mirrored configuration, yielding 18T of actual space.) Reading the nice documentation and some articles on the Oracle Technology Network I saw great possibilities with the embedded ECMAScript3/JavaScript engine in the 7000 series.  In my personal opinion anyone who's dealing with Exalogic administration, or exposed to any of the 7000 series of storage appliances and servers that Oracle offers should have a VirtualBox instance of it kicking around. For development and testing it's a fantastic tool. (It can save you from explaining (most) of the embarrassing FAILS you can do if you test something in a production system to your management...) So download, and install.  A small sidestep, if after firing up the 7000 series simulator in VirtualBox you've forgotten what it's IP address is, the following will sort you out if you log in directly via the running VirtualBox VM. So in my case I can ssh to 192.168.56.101 or point a browser to https://192.168.56.101:215 to log into the storage appliance. One simple way of executing a script on the 7320 is to ssh to the device and redirecting a file with the script in it to ssh. ssh [email protected] < myscript.js One question I got from my client and the people who will take over the systems was: "how can we see the quotas and allocations for all projects/shares in one easy go so we don't have to go navigating around in the BUI for all the hundreds of shares the 7320 is hosting just to check if anything is running dry?" Easy! JavaScript time, VirtualBox and emacs! //NOTE! this script is available 'as is' It has ben run on a couple of 7320's, (running 2010.08.17.3.0,1-1.25 & // 2011.04.24.1.0,1-1.8) a 7420 and the VB image, but I personally //offer no guarantee whatsoever that it won't make your server topple, catch fire or in any way go pear shaped.. //run at your own risk or learn from my code and or mistakes.. script run('cd /'); run('shares'); //get all projects: proj = list(); function spaceToGig(bytes){ return bytes/1073741824; //convert bytes to GB } function fullInPercent(quota, space_data){ tmp = (space_data/quota)*100; return tmp; } //print header, slightly good looking printf(" %s/%-15s %8s(GB) %7s(GB) %5s(GB) %7s(GB) %3s\n","Project", "Share","Quota","Ref", "Snap", "Total","%full"); printf("-------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n") //for each project, get all shares. check for quota and calculate percentage and human readable figures.. for (i=0;i<proj.length;i++){ run('select ' + proj[i]); //get all shares for a project var pshares = list(); //for each share get quota properties for (j=0;j<pshares.length;j++){ run('select ' + pshares[j]); quota = get('quota'); //properties associated with a share or inherited from a project spaceData = get('space_data'); spaceSnap = get('space_snapshots'); spaceTotal = get('space_total'); if(quota>0){ //has quota printf(" %s/%-15s \t%4.2fGB\t%.2fGB\t%.2fGB\t%.2fGB\t%5.2f%%\n",proj[i], pshares[j],spaceToGig(quota),spaceToGig(spaceData),spaceToGig(spaceSnap),spaceToGig(spaceTotal),fullInPercent(quota,spaceTotal)); }else{ //no quota printf(" %s/%-15s \t%8s\t%.2fGB\t%.2fGB\t%.2fGB\t%s\n",proj[i],pshares[j], "N/A", spaceToGig(spaceData),spaceToGig(spaceSnap),spaceToGig(spaceTotal),"N/A"); } run('cd ..'); } run('done'); } The resulting output should look something like this: Project/Share Quota(GB) Ref(GB) Snap(GB) Total(GB) %full ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACSExalogicSystem/domains N/A 0.04GB 0.00GB 0.04GB N/A ACSExalogicSystem/logs N/A 0.01GB 0.00GB 0.01GB N/A ACSExalogicSystem/nodemgrs N/A 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00GB N/A ACSExalogicSystem/stores N/A 0.04GB 0.00GB 0.04GB N/A ***_dev/FMW_***_1 133GB 4.24GB 0.01GB 4.25GB 3.19% ***_dev/FMW_***_2 N/A 4.25GB 0.01GB 4.26GB N/A ***_dev/applications 10GB 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00% ***_dev/domains 50GB 10.75GB 3.55GB 14.30GB 28.61% ***_dev/logs 20GB 0.32GB 0.01GB 0.33GB 1.66% ***_dev/softwaredepot 20GB 4.15GB 0.00GB 4.15GB 20.73% ***_dev/stores 20GB 0.01GB 0.00GB 0.01GB 0.05% ###_dev/FMW_###_1 400GB 17.63GB 0.12GB 17.75GB 4.44% ###_dev/applications N/A 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00GB N/A ###_dev/domains 120GB 14.21GB 5.53GB 19.74GB 16.45% ###_dev/logs 15GB 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00GB 0.00% ###_dev/softwaredepot 250GB 73.55GB 0.02GB 73.57GB 29.43% …snip My apologies if the output is a bit mis-aligned here and there, I only bothered making it look good, not perfect :/ I also removed some of the project names (*,#)

    Read the article

  • Small script to look for Project Replication actions that have failed

    - by Trond Strømme
    Today when looking at a couple of projects on a ZFS 7320 Storage Appliance I noticed on one project that one of its replication actions had failed, as I hadn't checked the Recent Alerts log yet I was not aware of this. I decided to write a small script to check if there were others that had failed. Nothing fancy, just a loop through all projects, look at the project's replication child and compare the values of the last_sync and last_try properties and print the result if they're not equal. (There are probably more sensible ways of doing this, but at least it involves me getting the chance to put on my headphones and doing just a little bit of coding.) script // this script will locate failed project level replication // it will look at the sync times for 'last_sync' and 'last_try' // and compare these, if they deviate you should investigate. // NOTE! this code is offered 'as is' Run at your own risk, // it will probably work as intended, but in now way can I // (or Oracle) be held responsible if your server starts behaving // like a three year old kid in a candy store.. (not that mine do, // they are very well behaved boys...) run('configuration'); run('storage'); printf('Host: %s, pool: %s\n', get('owner'),get('pool')); run('cd /'); run('shares'); proj=list(); printf("total projects: %d\n",proj.length +'\n'); // just for project level replication for(i=0;i<proj.length;i++){ run('select '+proj[i]); run('replication'); //get all replication actions preps = list(); for(j=0;j<preps.length;j++){ run('select ' + preps[j]); last_sync = get('last_sync'); last_try = get('last_try'); // printf("target %s\n", get('target')); //why the flip does this not get the proper name? if(!( last_sync.valueOf() === last_try.valueOf())){ printf("sync has failed for %s %s\n", proj[i], get('target')); }else{ // printf("OK %s %s\n", proj[i], get('target')); } run('done'); //done with the replica action } run('done'); run('done'); } printf("finished\n"); For a more on how to run the script, or testing it please look at my previous post. Sample output: Host: elb1sn01, pool: exalogic total projects: 45 sync has failed for ACSExalogicSystem cb3a24fe-ad60-c90f-d15d-adaafd595639 finished

    Read the article

  • Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages

    - by trond
    After upgrading from 10.04 to 12.04 I am trying to install different packages. For instance ia32-libs and skype (4.0). When trying to install these, I am getting the 'Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages' error message. Output of commands: sudo apt-get install -f Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After running this: sudo dpkg --configure -a [email protected]:~$ sudo apt-get install -f Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

    Read the article

  • Delete array of size 1

    - by Arne
    This is possibly a candidate for a one-line answer. I would like know it anyway.. I am writing a simple circular buffer and for some reasons that are not important for the question I need to implement it using an array of doubles. In fact I have not investiated other ways to do it, but since an array is required anyway I have not spent much time on looking for alternatives. template<typename T> class CircularBuffer { public: CircularBuffer(unsigned int size); ~CircularBuffer(); void Resize(unsigned int new_size); ... private: T* buffer; unsigned int buffer_size; }; Since I need to have the buffer dynamically sized the buffer_size is neither const nor a template parameter. Now the question: During construction and in function Resize(int) I only require the size to be at least one, although a buffer of size one is effectively no longer a buffer. Of course using a simple double instead would be more appropriate but anyway. Now when deleting the internal buffer in the destructor - or in function resize for that matter - I need to delete the allocated memory. Question is, how? First candidate is of course delete[] buffer; but then again, if I have allocated a buffer of size one, that is if the pointer was aquired with buffer = new T[0], is it still appropriate to call delete[] on the pointer or do I need to call delete buffer; (without brackets) ? Thanks, Arne

    Read the article

  • Use of const double for intermediate results

    - by Arne
    Hi, I a writing a Simulation program and wondering if the use of const double is of any use when storing intermediate results. Consider this snippet: double DoSomeCalculation(const AcModel &model) { (...) const double V = model.GetVelocity(); const double m = model.GetMass(); const double cos_gamma = cos(model.GetFlightPathAngleRad()); (...) return m*V*cos_gamma*Chi_dot; } Note that the sample is there only to illustrate -- it might not make to much sense from the engineering side of things. The motivation of storing for example cos_gamma in a variable is that this cosine is used many time in other expressions covered by (...) and I feel that the code gets more readable when using cos_gamma rather than cos(model.GetFlightPathAngleRad()) in various expressions. Now the actual is question is this: since I expect the cosine to be the same througout the code section and I actually created the thing only as a placeholder and for convenience I tend to declare it const. Is there a etablished opinion on wether this is good or bad practive or whether it might bite me in the end? Does a compiler make any use of this additional information or am I actually hindering the compiler from performing useful optimizations? Arne

    Read the article

  • Importing an object from Blender into a scene, rotation on X axis?

    - by Arne
    This is my situation: I save the scene with blender no export with any processing steps. Blender has x right y up -z into the scene for the view coordinates (OpenGL) I have x right y up -z into the scene for the view coordinates (OpenGl) Bleneder has x/y plane and z up as world coordinates I have x/y plane and z up as world coordinates I load the mesh with assimp directly from the blend file with absolutely no post processing. The object is rotated abount p/2 on the x-axis. Why?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to get the old workspaceswitcher back in the top-panel?

    - by Arne
    I just updated my Ubuntu from 10.04 to 12.04 yesterday and so far I'm very satisfied with it. There is only one thing which is still missing to get back just the same comfort as I had with the previous version. I work on 4 workspaces and would like to have the ability to switch from one to another by just one click. With Gnome there was the possibility to add the workspace switcher to the top-panel next to the system tray and I could easily click on just the workspace I wanted to switch to. Of course there I could switch by using the keyboard shortcuts, but I would like to use the mouse in addition. I don't like using the switcher on the left side because it's much slower. Is it possible to get the old workplace switcher back in the panel at the top?

    Read the article

  • usb vs firewire for connecting two RAID 0 disks

    - by Arne
    I have a 2TB and a 4TB RAID 0 external drives (both have two physical hard drives in them). Both have a FW800, FW400, and USB port. My MacBook Pro has one FW800 port and two USB ports. I want to copy data from the 4TB drive to the 2TB drive. Is it better to A - connect both directly to the laptop, one with USB and one with FW800 or B - connect the 4TB drive to laptop with FW800 and the 2TB drive to the 4TB drive using a FW400 cable? Anyone have problems daisy-chaining RAID 0 disks using FW? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How do I handle a request for "index.php/somepath" in Nginx config?

    - by Arne
    I'm currently attempting to serve Icinga from nginx. The new Icinga-Web ui attempts to load a file from URL http://SERVER/icinga-web/index.php/appkit/squishloader/javascript (leading to a 404). How do I setup a location for this scenario? How do I get nginx to serve index.php and pass the full request path in a way Icinga understands? This is my current nginx config for icinga (adapted from the default apache config): server { server_name SERVER; root /opt/icinga/icinga-1.2.1; location /icinga-web/js/ext3 { alias /opt/icinga/icinga-1.2.1/lib/ext3; } location /icinga-web { alias /opt/icinga/icinga-1.2.1/pub; } location /icinga/cgi-bin { alias /opt/icinga/icinga-1.2.1/sbin; } location /icinga { alias /opt/icinga/icinga-1.2.1/share; } location ~ \.php([\?/].*)?$ { include fastcgi_params; fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:61000; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; } } Any thoughts? Thanks!

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >