[Work_Item] Add Service Model

[SonalGarg-SG]

1. Problem Statement *

Describe the problem, issue, use case, or opportunity that this work item addresses.
Include practitioner quotes illustrating real examples a) of questions being asked by practitioners and b) value unlocked by answering these questions, if available.

• What is the problem?: Explain the context and why it needs resolution.
• Impact: Describe how the problem affects users, systems, or the project.

Many of our customers have a need to break down the data and the cost from the multiple cloud providers to IaaS, PaaS and SaaS service models. It would be great if we could invest some time on doing that breakdown (along the lines of categorization and subcategorization)

Use cases:

• Identifying high-level service models for potential modernization.

2. Objective *

State the objective of this work item. What outcome is expected?

• Success Criteria: Define how success will be measured (e.g. metrics and KPIs).

Add a column that indicates what service model the charge falls into.

3. Supporting Documentation *

Include links to supporting documents such as:

• Data Examples: [Link to data or relevant files; DO NOT share proprietary information]
• Related Use Cases or Discussion Documents: [Link to discussion]
• PRs or Other References: [Link to relevant references]

About service models:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing#Service_models
• https://cloud.google.com/learn/paas-vs-iaas-vs-saas?hl=en
• https://medium.com/@nnilesh7756/what-are-cloud-computing-services-iaas-caas-paas-faas-saas-ac0f6022d36e

Sample mapping dataset (Microsoft FinOps toolkit): https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cloud-computing/finops/toolkit/open-data#services

Potential values:

• IaaS
• PaaS
• SaaS
• FaaS
• CaaS
• On-prem

We need to discuss how low-level we go. There are many PaaS breakdowns for different service categories.

4. Proposed Solution / Approach

Outline any proposed solutions, approaches, or potential paths forward. Do not submit detailed solutions; please keep suggestions high-level.

• Initial Ideas: Describe potential solution paths, tools, or technologies.
• Considerations: Include any constraints, dependencies, or risks.
• Feasibility: Include any information that helps quantify feasibility, such as perceived level of effort to augment the spec, or existing fields in current data generator exports.
• Benchmarks: Are there established best practices for solving this problem available to practitioners today (e.g. mappings from existing CSP exports that are widely used)?

Create a new ServiceModel column with normalized values.

Whenever we are ready, I can start with a spreadsheet to discuss those.

5. Epic or Theme Association

This section will be completed by the Maintainers.

• Epic: [Epic Name]
• Theme: [Theme Name, if applicable]

TBD

6. Stakeholders *

List the main stakeholders for this issue.

• Primary Stakeholder: [Name/Role]
• Other Involved Parties: [Names/Roles]

• Bernard Etienne (Sodexo)
• Graham Murphy (Australian Retirement Trust)

Do you want to see this column in FOCUS?

Give it a 👍 below ↴

Comments are welcome and encouraged!

[jpradocueva]

Action Items from Maintainers call on August 5th.

Action Items:

• [Maintainers] Classify the request to add Service Model Information as a feature for a future release (1.2 or later).
• [Maintainers] Revisit this feature request in the planning phase of the next release cycle.

[cnharris10]

Also a chat from 9/24/24 on this topic from #chat-focus with @thecloudman and Bernard each giving a 👍

[jpradocueva]

Summary TF-2 call on Oct 16:

#510 [Conference]: Adding ServiceModel Information
Key Discussion Items: The request was made to include service model information (SaaS, IaaS, PaaS) for each service in the provider’s data.
Problem Identification: This information is crucial for practitioners to assess the types of services they are being billed for.
Divergent Views: None significant.
Final Agreement: A work item will be created, and this topic will be advocated for in the 1.2 release.
Action Items:
[TF-2-#510] Shawn, @shawnalpay volunteered to create the work item.

[shawnalpay]

I really like the following graphic from this article as a potential breakdown of Service Models:

[jpradocueva]

Notes from the Maintainers' call on November 4:

Context: The addition of service model flags for Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS), and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) aims to help practitioners categorize and understand their cloud expenditures more effectively. Currently, practitioners face challenges in distinguishing and reporting costs by service model, which is essential for accurate financial tracking and analysis within FinOps. By flagging services according to these classifications, the specification would enable clearer insights into spending patterns, facilitating more informed financial decisions. This work item was introduced to provide practitioners with standardized data for segmenting costs, which aligns with the broader goals of improving transparency and usability in the FOCUS specification.
Level of Impact: Medium – Introducing flags for different service models (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS) assists practitioners in categorizing expenses by service type, providing clearer insights into spending and improving reporting accuracy.