Patent Publication Number: US-7587706-B2

Title: Method to provide secure multi-vendor system sizings

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     1. Technical Field 
     The present invention relates in general to the field of computers, and in particular to sizing computer systems according to a customer&#39;s input. More particularly, the present invention relates to a method and computer program for creating a computer system, including hardware and software, that allows each subsystem provider to securely provide information about a particular subsystem without disclosing proprietary information about that subsystem. 
     2. Description of the Related Art 
     To optimally configure a computer system composed of multiple subsystems and meeting a customer&#39;s performance (capacity and throughput) requirements has traditionally required the use of scarce, highly-trained technical individuals who understand the total solution requirements of each subsystem, the interfaces between subsystems, and the ripple effect of changing each subsystem. 
     While computer-based sizing guides have been developed to aid in the process of sizing a system, such sizing guides generally still require a highly-trained system specialist to develop a sizing guide for each application (or environment). That is, such sizing guides still require the specialist to keep track of subsystem interactions and to have expertise in the area of hardware and software loads for particular needs. 
     Subsystem vendors may not wish to release performance factors of their solutions for fear that competitors will use these factors in competition against the subsystem vendor. For example, an e-mail program from a first vendor may require a total of 20 Megabytes of memory for a system with 10 users. Of the 20 Megabytes, 10 Megabytes may be required for the baseline system, and another 10 Megabytes may be required for the 10 users, each user requiring 1Megabyte of memory. If this level of performance detail were known to a second vendor, then the second vendor may be able to re-design his system to still require 20 Megabytes of memory, but requiring only 0.9 Megabytes of memory per user, thus appearing to be more efficient. 
     Sizing of a computer system needs to be a precise operation. That is, if the system is underpowered, either in the hardware or software, then performance will be lacking. Alternatively, if the system is overpowered, then there are wasted resources and the system&#39;s expense was higher than required. Either scenario is common when purchasing off-the-shelf software. Such software typically does not provide adequate configuration granularity to avoid configuring an overpowered or underpowered system. 
     What is needed therefore, is a method for sizing a computer system that permits separate independent development and hosting of each subsystem in the computer system, while also providing each subsystem provider adequate security to prevent unnecessary scrutiny of the subsystem&#39;s performance parameters. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     The present invention is directed to a method for sizing a computer system. Toolsets defining required performance of a subsystem, as well as hardware and software resources available to the subsystem, are transmitted to a subsystem provider. The subsystem provider responds with information about a subsystem that specifically comports with the toolset&#39;s definitions of performance and available resources. Whether two subsystem providers respond to a same toolset for a same subsystem or to different toolsets for different subsystems, the two subsystem providers are blocked from viewing the other subsystem provider&#39;s response. Further, each subsystem provider&#39;s response includes only information needed to comport with the toolset, thus preventing unnecessary disclosure of specifications of the subsystem beyond those defined in the toolset. 
     The above, as well as additional objectives, features, and advantages of the present invention will become apparent in the following detailed written description. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       The novel features believed characteristic of the invention are set forth in the appended claims. The invention itself, however, as well as a preferred mode of use, further purposes and advantages thereof, will best be understood by reference to the following detailed description of an illustrative embodiment when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, where: 
         FIG. 1  is a flow-chart depicting the steps taken by the system integrator to create an environment which allows the following steps to be undertaken. 
         FIG. 2  is a flow-chart depicting steps taken to provide a subsystem to a sizing server; 
         FIG. 3  illustrates system components used to provide the subsystem to the sizing server; 
         FIG. 4  depicts an exemplary webpage provided to a user terminal to obtain information needed to create a toolset describing the needs of a user; 
         FIG. 5  illustrates the webpage depicted in  FIG. 4 , completed for use by a subsystem provider defining required performance capability of the subsystem; 
         FIG. 6  depicts an exemplary webpage, completed by the subsystem provider, of specifications for the subsystem that meet the requirements defined in  FIG. 5 , and also describing system needs of the subsystem; and 
         FIG. 7  illustrates an exemplary data processing system appropriate for use as a user terminal, a sizing server, or a subsystem server according to the present invention. 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT 
     With reference now to the figures, and in particular to  FIG. 1 , there is depicted a flowchart of exemplary preferred steps taken by the systems integrator to create an automated environment that supports the security and integration of multiple subsystem vendors&#39; components. Starting with initiator block  102 , the subsystem vendor needs to develop a tool kit (block  104 ) which supports the fill-in-the-blanks (such as depicted in  FIG. 6 ) approach that the subsystem vendor will use to define their subsystem (such as subsystem definitions  306   x  depicted in  FIG. 3 ). 
     The systems integrator vendor hosts a site (block  106 ) which allows the subsystems vendors to download the tool kit (as described below in block  204  of  FIG. 2 ) that was created in block  104  and develop a secure website (block  108 ). When completed, this secure website is hosted as shown in a sizing guide website  304  on a sizing server  318 , shown in  FIG. 3 . This website (block  204 ) provides access to terminal users (block  202 ). 
     With reference now to  FIG. 2 , there is depicted a flow-chart of exemplary preferred steps taken by a subsystem provider to create a subsystem that comports with the needs and requirements of a system integrator according to future customer&#39;s requirements. Starting with initiator block  202 , a tool kit (as described in  FIG. 1  with reference to block  104 ) is downloaded (block  204 ) by the subsystem vendor from the system integrator hosting website  304  (also seen in  FIG. 3 ). The tool kit is downloaded from a secure tool repository maintained in a sizing server, such as a sizing server  318  seen in  FIG. 3 . The tool kit is used to define a set of performance parameters, including a definition of a performance capability of a subsystem, such as a subsystem server  320  depicted in  FIG. 3 , as well as a definition of hardware and software resources provided by, required by and in conflict with, (i.e., mutually exclusive, as described in further detail below with regards to  FIG. 6 ), the requested subsystem. 
     For example, a toolset, preferably implemented as a set of software code, may describe desired parameters of a subsystem that is a software program. However, rather than defining sizing requirements at a level of detail that would require a highly skilled technical engineer, only high-level requirements are defined by the toolset. Details of an exemplary toolset are discussed below with reference to  FIGS. 4-5 . 
     Similarly, the toolset may describe the desired parameters of hardware subsystem. Again, the toolset is used to define characteristics at a subsystem-level. For example, if the desired hardware subsystem is a hard disk drive, then the toolset would define and describe performance parameters required (e.g., access time, power consumption, disk cache size, etc.) as well as the system resources available to the hard disk drive, including available hardware (bus interface to which the hard disk drive will be coupled) and software (operating system that will be controlling the hard disk drive). 
     Referring again to  FIG. 2 , the subsystem provider develops (or updates) subsystem specifications from the toolset (block  206 ), preferably using a fill-in-the-blanks approach. The resulting subsystem specification is then saved by the subsystem provider  320 , preferably as an eXtended Markup Language (XML) definition file (block  208 ). Further detail of how this XML definition file is created is discussed below. 
     The subsystem provider then tests the definition file (query block  210 ), using specification parameters as would be defined by a customer at a user terminal  302  (described in further detail below) and interfacing with the sizing guide website  304 . If the definition file passes the sizing test (meets the specification requirements defined by the toolset and the customer&#39;s specifications), then the subsystem definition is sent (block  212 ) to the secure sizing server  318  seen in  FIG. 3 . The system integrator operating the sizing server  318  is then notified of the availability of the subsystem (block  214 ), and the process ends (terminator block  216 ). 
     With reference again to  FIG. 3 , there is illustrated a block-diagram of systems used in the present invention, with additional details showing steps taken by customers to help define appropriate subsystems. A user terminal  302 , operated by a customer, transmits input selections  314  to sizing server  318 , which the system integrator uses to host a sizing guide website  304 . The input selections  314  comport with toolset parameters defined by the system integrator, such as shown in  FIG. 4 , showing a user webpage  400  that is provided to a customer using user terminal  302 . The customer inputs selections, either in a “fill-in-the-blank” active area such as shown, or the customer may click a radio button or any other active area (not shown) of the user webpage  400 . 
     With reference to  FIG. 5 , the customer has indicated a need for an e-mail system for 75 users, sending/receiving a total of no more than 5000 messages a day. The customer has also identified the average number of days that e-mail will be retained (30), the anticipated percentage of mail messages that will contain attachment files (20%), the anticipated percentage of mail messages that will contain video or audio attachments (5%), the percentage of messages that are to be encrypted (80%), and the percentage of messages that will need delivery confirmation (75%). 
     Referring again to  FIG. 3 , the input selections  314  chosen by the customer in  FIG. 5  is sent to the sizing server  318 , which then uses the customer input selections  314  to complete a specialized toolset  310 , shown as toolsets  310   a - n.  Each toolset  310  may be the same (using the same input selections  314 ) or different (using different input selections  314  from the same customer). That is, toolset  310   a  and toolset  310   b  could be the same toolset defining parameters for the same hardware or software subsystem, or toolset  310   a  and toolset  310   b  may be for different subsystems, either hardware or software. 
     If toolsets  310   a  and  310   b  are the same, then a system integrator who is operating sizing server  318  can select the most desirable (e.g., best performance based on cost) available subsystem definition  306  (i.e., subsystem 1 definition  306   a  and subsystem 2 definition  306   b ) from the different subsystem servers  320   a  and  320   b.    
     Each subsystem server  320  responds, if possible, with a subsystem definition  306  that comports with the requirements of the toolset  310  that is populated by the customer at user terminal  302 . The subsystem server  320  uses undisclosed algorithms, which are protected from view behind a firewall and security  308 . That is, each subsystem provider uses his proprietary algorithm to develop and configure a subsystem that comports with the user&#39;s requirements according to the toolset  310 . For example, refer again to  FIG. 5 , which depicts a webpage  500  that is populated with information from an exemplary toolset  310   a.  Webpage  500  is sent to a vendor who is operating subsystem server  320   a.  The vendor&#39;s subsystem definition  306   x  running on subsystem server  320   a  directly captures the information in the active fields and determines what the performance requirements and available system resources are for the requested subsystem. In addition to the information shown in  FIG. 5 , the system integrator operating sizing server  318  may also define what hardware and/or software is available, as well as any other hardware/software incompatibility issues that the system integrator may anticipate. 
     Whether the subsystem server  320   a  directly or indirectly manipulates toolset  310   a,  subsystem server  320   a  then creates a subsystem  1  definition  306   a  that meets the requirements found in toolset  310   a.  The creation of subsystem  1  definition  306   a  is accomplished in any manner chosen by the vendor who is operating subsystem server  320   a.  For example, the vendor may host an automatic system that configures the requested subsystem using data from a webpage (such as webpage  500 ) or directly from the toolset (such as toolset  310   a ). It is significant to note that the algorithm used by the subsystem vendor is preferably not revealed to the system integrator or any other outside party, especially other subsystem vendors. 
     The vendor then tests the configured subsystem to ensure that the subsystem meets the requirements of the toolset  310 . Each subsystem server  320  (including subsystem server  320   a ) then sends a responsive subsystem definition  306  (e.g., subsystem 1 definition  306   a  from subsystem server  320   a ), preferably in XML format, back to sizing server  318 . 
       FIG. 6  depicts a webpage  600  that has been populated by an exemplary subsystem definition  306 . For example, assume that subsystem 1 definition  306   a  is for an e-mail program that meets the requirements described in webpage  500  in  FIG. 5 . The XML formatted subsystem 1 definition  306   a  then populates active fields in webpage  600 . Such active windows may include definitions of performance capability (e.g., “Required attachment size”) as well as required resources (e.g., “Required HDD access time,” “Server interface,” etc.). In addition, the XML formatted subsystem 1 definition  306   a  also populates active fields for other characteristics of the e-mail subsystem, such as the “Program name,” and “Price.” In addition, the XML formatted subsystem 1 definition  306   a  can populate information about “Incompatible software” and “Incompatible hardware” that may or not be in toolset  310   a.  That is, toolset  310   a  may or may not describe other hardware or software that is planned for a system to which subsystem 1 definition  306   a  is incompatible. In exemplary webpage  600 , subsystem 1 definition  306   a  is described as being incompatible with Microsoft® Outlook™ Version 6.0, and is also will not operate properly if there is an Enhanced Integrated Drive Electronics (EIDE) compliant Compact Disk-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) drive. Note that it is preferably the responsibility of the system integrator to handle hardware and software incompatibility issues, just as it is the responsibility of the system integrator to optimally configure the system requested by the customer. 
     With reference now to  FIG. 7 , there is depicted a block diagram of a data processing system  700  appropriate for use as user terminal  302 , sizing server  318 , and/or each subsystem server  320 . Preferably, user terminal  302 , sizing server  318 , and each subsystem server  320  is a different data processing system, although in an alternatively embodiment, the function and operations of one or more of user terminal  302 , sizing server  318 , and each subsystem server  320  may be performed by a same data processing system, such as data processing system  700  in which a preferred embodiment of the present invention may be implemented. Data processing system  700  may be, for example, one of the models of personal or server computers available from International Business Machines Corporation of Armonk, N.Y. Data processing system  700  includes a central processing unit (CPU)  702 , which is connected to a system bus  708 . In the exemplary embodiment, data processing system  700  includes a graphics adapter  704  also connected to system bus  708 , for providing user interface information to a display  706 . 
     Also connected to system bus  708  are a system memory  710  and an input/output (I/O) bus bridge  712 . I/O bus bridge  712  couples an I/O bus  714  to system bus  708 , relaying and/or transforming data transactions from one bus to the other. Peripheral devices such as nonvolatile storage  716 , which may be a hard disk drive, and input device  718 , which may include a conventional mouse, a trackball, or the like, is connected to I/O bus  714 . Also connected to I/O bus  714  is a network adapter  720  for connection to a network (not shown). 
     The exemplary embodiment shown in  FIG. 7  is provided solely for the purposes of explaining the invention and those skilled in the art will recognize that numerous variations are possible, both in form and function. For instance, data processing system  700  might also include a compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM) or digital versatile disk (DVD) drive, a sound card and audio speakers, and numerous other optional components. All such variations are believed to be within the spirit and scope of the present invention. 
     It should be understood that at least some aspects of the present invention may alternatively be implemented in a program product. Programs defining functions on the present invention can be delivered to a data storage system or a computer system via a variety of signal-bearing media, which include, without limitation, non-writable storage media (e.g., CD-ROM), writable storage media (e.g., a floppy diskette, hard disk drive, read/write CD ROM, optical media), and communication media, such as computer and telephone networks including Ethernet. It should be understood, therefore in such single-bearing media when carrying or encoding computer readable instructions that direct method functions in the present invention, represent alternative embodiments of the present invention. Further, it is understood that the present invention may be implemented by a system having means in the form of hardware, software, or a combination of software and hardware as described herein or their equivalent. 
     The present invention thus provides a method for sizing a computer system in which different subsystem components are able to be separately defined and then brought together to provide a total solution to the sizing problem. Each vendor of the different subsystems is able to configure his subsystem to the exact specifications of a system integrator without revealing proprietary information about the subsystem. The total system is then assembled by the system integrator in a compartmentalized and secure manner. 
     The figures of the present disclosure describe an exemplary subsystem that is an e-mail program. Note, however, that the present invention as described is applicable for use with any type of hardware or software subsystem described by a toolset. For example, the disclosed invention is also useful in creating a hardware system such as an airplane or a ship, in which each of the subsystems (e.g., engines, fuselage, wing, avionics) are securely and independently developed and hosted by a vendor, who then offers current solutions based on criteria supplied by the manufacturer. 
     Thus, while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to a preferred embodiment, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.