The CMDB Federation proceeeds at its usual glacial pace
The CMDB Federation was formed in April 2006 by CMDB vendors so they could tell people they were moving towards a common standard of interoperability, known in the CMDB world as "federation", so the group is called the Federation. Two years later what have we got to show? Glacial advance. That's the way the vendors want it.
Way back when, the IT Skeptic said "I am still highly sceptical that their is any real commitment by the parties to a result, as compared to a need to be seen to be doing something. That need has now been filled for a while. "
We have crept up to version 1.0b of the draft specification, dated January 2008, so there has been some change since the first release of the specification.
More importantly the draft has been handed over to the DMTF. But don't expect that to mean a published standard any time soon.
I also said last year "standards gestate like elephants: it will be even longer before a standard sees the light of day. My latest prediction is that by the time it does emerge blinking, nobody will give a flying fox anyway. CMDB will be, like, so 2007, and IT's chattering classes will be whipping some new concept to fever pitch, safely way out ahead of the possibility of actually building or delivering anything."
William Vambenepe points out that
I can’t help noticing in the press release is that none of the quotes from the companies submitting the specification tout federation, but simply “integration” or “sharing”. For example: “integration and interoperability” (BMC), “share data” (CA), “sharing of information” (HP), “view, track and change information” (IBM), “exchange data” (Microsoft). This more realistic assessment of what the specification does stands in contrast to the way the DMTF presents it in the press release : “this specification provides a standard way to federate management data stored in multiple different data models”. At this point, it doesn’t really provide federation and especially not across different models.
Nothing on the DMTF website but press releases. Try to find anything by navigating from the homepage.
So, more hype and still no results. Nobody is mentioning any dates for the standard to emerge. I also said in the past "When that fine day dawns [of a published standard] we'll finally have the ability to build heterogeneous IT management environments. The IT Swami predicts that this will give a tremendous boost to open source tools such as Zenoss. They will be able to displace vendor tools one bite at a time instead of a revolutionary overturning, thus making them far more attractive to companies who want to ease carefully into open source. No wonder there is no great rush to finish this."
Still waiting. Funny that. In the meantime, as I warned previously:
"WARNING: vendors will waive this white paper around to overcome buyer resistance to a mixed-vendor solution. For example if you already have availablity monitoring from one of them, one of the other vendors will try to sell you their service desk and use this paper as a promise that the two will play nicely. "