The Virtual Machine is like Neo in The Matrix. The IT world shapes itself around the VM. Remember the ‘Classic 3-Tier network architecture with Layer-2 and Layer-3 segmentation, a standard address hierarchy, and consistent policies????, Burn it. Throw it away. It is dead. Fundamentally virtualization broke the network. Fortunately we are not alone. Virtualization broke the servers, shifted the information to centralized pools (SAN or NAS in most cases) , and reforged operational processes. Virtualization as a technology and its associated capabilities is more important to IT leadership than legacy server architectures, legacy network architectures, and legacy storage architectures. To quote Bob Dylan, The Times they are A-Changin’. (coincidentally what I am listening to right this second… Up next All Along the Watchtower (Hendrix version))Why? Why is it so groundbreaking, so transformative? Why not just keep doing things the way we have been? Why is virtualization more valuable than 10-15 years of best practice? Read More »
The London Underground. The Tube. The first subway system. This system showcases the value of multi-nodal designs and symmetric traffic capabilities in creating a high-value system. The more nodes connected to a network, the more valuable the network is – gestalt. This is the reason the Internet is the valuable communications medium that it is today – the most valuable communications medium ever. Read More »
As I read about forced industry consolidations and our competitor’s ambitious plans to catch up with Cisco to deliver Unified Fabric years from now, it makes me realize the power and effect of Cisco Unified Fabric vision. While these companies have just started to work on these “me too” plans and may or may not be able to deliver even years from now, Cisco customers are already reaping the benefits delivered by Cisco Nexus switch products based on Unified Fabric architecture. Read More »
Since there are folks out there that would have you believe we will see cold fusion before we see a Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) standard, I thought it would be a good time to provide an update, especially because the T11 working group tasked with developing the standard has been putting in some significant effort.To bring everyone up to speed, the FCoE standard is being developed by the T11 Technical Committee within INCITS. The T11 committee defines all the aspects of the Fibre Channel protocols. The work on FCoE started in April 2007, when T11 was led by Bob Snively (Brocade) as Chair and Claudio DeSanti (Cisco) as Vice-Chair. Sadly, earlier this year, Bob died and Claudio has been acting as interim chair. The actual FCoE development work is being carried out in the FC-BB-5 (Fibre Channel – Backbone – 5) working group, which is led by Claudio as Chair, and has Dave Peterson (Brocade) as Editor. Read More »
The likelihood is that storage arrays will be linked to the Nexus in this scheme by Ethernet and not Fibre Channel. MDS9000 Fibre Channel fabric switches won’t appear in this setup because including Fibre Channel will be the very antithesis of a unified fabric.
Let me give you my perspective on this. Fibre Channel is all but the antithesis of a unified fabric, it’s part and parcel of it and it’s here to stay, as independent technology or co-existing with other connectivity options, including FCoE. Which by definition is Fibre Channel, simply carried over Ethernet. And MDS 9000 Family, Cisco Storage Area Networks, is a critical component of Cisco Unified Fabric strategy to support Fibre Channel, Storage Services and, in the future, FCoE connectivity to complete the unification of SAN and LAN. I talk a lot to customers, journalists, analysts and the question about the disruptive introduction of FCoE does come up all the time. And it comes up in a consistent variety (what an oxymoron!) of ways. Is FCoE going to kill Fibre Channel (and hence is Cisco not investing anymore in MDS 9000 product line)? Is FCoE going to kill iSCSI? Or is iSCSI going to kill FCoE (and maybe Fibre Channel too, why not?) I typically split my answer in two parts: the first about technology, the second about Cisco approach to technologies in general. It helps a lot to clarify how the future (and Cisco commitment) of the storage industry will shape.