Competitors are harping about the potential for lock-in with Cisco‘s Application-Centric Infrastructure (ACI), even if pieces such as the OpFlex protocol become open standards. They’ve got a point, but analysts do see some value in the policy-driven approach Cisco has taken.
Sources told Reuters that Junos Pulse would likely be valued at “hundreds of millions of dollars” in a sale.
Here’s our gathering of the week’s news bits around software-defined networking (SDN), network functions virtualization (NFV), and related topics.
Is software-defined networking truly a savior for overburdened, overly complex network systems? The Open Networking User Group (ONUG) has invited two distinguished professors to address both sides of the SDN debate as part of its spring conference, May 5-6 in New York City.
The network needs to cease to exist as a separate entity, it needs to become an integrated part of the application infrastructure that uses its services. That’s the kind of invisible we need to achieve.
There is probably never going to be a perfect balance in the industry between Do-it-yourself (DIY) and Do-it-for-you (DIFY) networking
Ultimately, being successful as an individual or as an organization requires more than just transactional engagement. To some extent, we all need to understand that free ice cream isn’t really free.
What is happening now is that we are at some risk of the luminaries creating an impassable distance between their vision and the on-the-ground reality in many IT shops today.
For whatever reason, the networking industry seems more open to innovation these days than for much of the past 15 years. We see the rise of important technologies like SDN, NFV, network virtualization, DevOps, and photonic switching. Every new technology threatens to disrupt some existing technology.
Operators like the ideas of open systems and open-source code when it comes to SDN and NFV deployments, but they consider neither concept a slam-dunk, judging from the results of a survey commissioned by the OpenDaylight Project.
Google’s pursuit of self-driving cars has been well documented over the years. The promise of fleets of vehicles that could potentially make driving safer while simultaneously shortening commute times makes it one of the most attractive futures technologies around. But where would self-driving cars be adopted first?
As virtualization transforms data center technology, it raises both challenges and opportunities on the testing and assurance front. Testing company Spirent dove into these issues at the recent Tech Field Day, Virtualization Field Day 3.
OpenFlow 2.0 doesn’t formally exist yet, but one possible shape of the protocol — a more flexible take on packet switching — is starting to form. In other words, what’s being proposed is a new type of switch, one that’s configurable in ways that aren’t possible today.
The paper describes how the authors created a leaf and spine model consisting of 5 racks with 20 servers each, connected with 10GbE. The 5 simulated ToR switches (the leafs) are then connected to modeled spine switches at various oversubscription rates.
The announcement a bit like a visit to some exotic bazaar: You could walk away with a really interesting set of stuff, but you have to do a bit of digging to find it. Here I’ll list the pieces I found interesting (or had the most to say about).
Here’s the man driving unified communications SDN at Microsoft: Pascal Menezes, principal program manager of the Skype and Lync UC product group. Pascal has a unique vantage point to observe the growing integration between UC and SDN.
New Juniper CEO Shaygan Kheradpir is in Barcelona for Mobile World Congress, and he’s getting high marks from analysts who met him at a private dinner Sunday night. Those I talked to on Monday had a high opinion of the man himself and said he’s expressing the right ideas for Juniper’s future.
Startup Corsa is developing OpenFlow 1.3 switches as an alternative to traditional switches, calling the result a programmable data plane. The company is announcing its presence on Monday ahead of next week’s Open Networking Summit.
As SDN moves closer to large-scale deployments, the issue of controller scaling is becoming a hotter topic. The consensus seems to favor some form of distributed cluster environment, likely in the form of federated clusters. But how should these federations be formed?
For many, SDN is about separating the control and forwarding planes. I’ll just point out that these planes have been separate for years in most modern networking equipment. That they might no longer be distributed within the same sheet metal is interesting but not really that game changing.
Joining us for the conversation was Brent Salisbury, who is also known as the network admin who became an SDN developer. Brent now works as a software developer on the OpenDaylight project for Red Hat. He blogs at NetworkStatic.net with a focus on disruptive technologies.
Cisco plans to apply software-defined networking (SDN) and policy management across three major areas — the WAN, the data center, and the access network — in an ambitious plan that, in a sense, turns the entire network into one product.
SDN is associated with disruption, the consensus being that it is a significant departure from the way networking has been handled for decades. Insofar as SDN marks a major architectural shift, it absolutely should be considered a disruption. But how does disruption relate to innovation in general?
NEC’s latest upgrade includes the ability to federate controllers, increasing its OpenFlow controller’s scalability tenfold. The Unified Network Coordinator was announced along with version 5.1 of the company’s ProgrammableFlow networking software.
If the future of federated controllers is based on service layering, then how do multiple controllers manage the same device? Is there a requirement for state synchronization? Do they share information about device operation or configuration?