Why a new OS?
I read an interesting article questioning why we created NX-OS. It’s a fair question so one I figured I’d pu together a few quick thoughts on….
NX-OS is not yet another Operating System. NX-OS has as its core Cisco SAN-OS. It is a modular, multi-process, multi-threaded Operating System that has full Stateful Process Restart and Zero-Service-Disruption Upgrades.
SAN- yes
LAN- yes
IP- Yes
IPv6- Yes
We really see NX-OS as our strategic operating system in the data center and actively envision multiple data center products converging into this single OS over the next year or two.
So a SAN administrator will find every feature they are used to, a LAN administrator familiar with the Catalyst line can pick it up and be productive in a few minutes.
We also created Virtual Device Contexts- this allows multiple administrators to operate a single Nexus concurrently. One Admin could restart OSPF and the other Admin’s OSPF would not be impacted at all. Complete process segmentation and separation, basically running server virtualization on the network control plane.
This lets you run a Lab-Net on top of production, model configuration changes, then cut them into production. It lets Service Providers offering hosting services allow some level of customer self-management for the top-tier customers that mandate it and also reduce failure domains. And lastly a SAN administrator and a LAN administrator can co-habitate without messing each other up.
dg
Posted by Douglas Gourlay at 12:39PM PST
kgraham Jan 30, 2008
Wasn’t most of this what IOS Modularity was supposed to deliver? Perhaps 4.x has improved significantly, but SANOS 3.x was still an ugly attempt at mimicking IOS. It’s very disappointing to see Cisco so quickly squander the value of having unified the Catalyst line under IOS.
If I could run my MDS like a 6500, then I cannot wait to deploy more FibreChannel rather than doing so begrudingly with every zone. Run my 6500 like an MDS? Please, no. (Not a Cisco dig, this goes for most vendors FC switches). The demand for FCoE is due to frustration with the existing SAN environments and to fold the SAN into existing ethernet infrastructure—/not/ the other way around.
A huge part Cisco’s value proposition is in the uniformity between platforms, that the 4900 or 3750 in a top-of-rack switch aggregating onto a 6500 core and dumping off to 7200’s and 7600’s all use common management instrumentation, a uniform CLI, configurations, etc. Only in their aggregate is this value realized and is why our enterprise shrugs off consideration of point-solutions, such as Force10 and Woven, who in a product-to-product comparison are often considerably more competitive.
Architecturally, a 3750, 4500, 6500, and 7200 have very, very little in common, but from the monitoring and operational vantage point they’re no different, and likewise reduce my operation expenditures (and complexity). At every point where Cisco has deviated from this, it creates a competitive situation out of what otherwise might have been an obvious Cisco purchase. I’ll wait to see how this pans out, but it certainly seems like Cisco has ensured that when it comes time to retire Sup720’s that it won’t be a matter of a simple “just bigger’n'badder” drop-in (whether that be a module or a whole chassis) upgrade with little retooling of internal processes, training, or monitoring infrastructure. Instead, short of talking to the same account management team, the Nexus 7000 is /not/ an incumbent upgrade and deserves no more consideration than an EX8200, EFX1000, or E600.