Networking

• Shine on U crazy diamond!

  Thu. May. 08, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

  DevCentral has an great post about the development of HA over the years. And he's a rocker too, which led me to a completely unrelated site that I liked.

  (this post was first made on my Storage @ Work blog)
   

  digg del.icio.us email this 2 comment(s)

• Microsoft Management Summit is very hot and Dell is in the buzz

  Tue. Apr. 29, 2008
  by Ed Reynolds, Dir, Dell Systems Mgmt Mktg

  A Dell employee emailed from the Microsoft Management Summit this morning:

  I am in the opening keynote here at MMS. Being the featured hardware partner for SCCM is awesome. The room is PACKED and attendees are hearing Microsoft talk about how great Dell systems management is.

  Microsoft’s Bob Muglia, MS SVP, highlighted Dell’s preliminary bare metal deployment pack in his keynote. Hubba hubba and hey now.

  Many of our customers use Microsoft’s System Center and Dell’s OpenManage to manage their infrastructure. And who do you think offers the most comprehensive device management through Microsoft’s System Center Suite? (Dell does) And we’re not resting. This week we’re announcing the upcoming availability of the latest Dell Management Packs for Microsoft System Center Operations Manager that will give customers superior monitoring and control of Dell desktops, portables, workstations, rack and tower servers, blades, networked storage devices and even printers.

  Our new plug-ins and our roadmap to integrate Dell Services with Microsoft products means our mutual customers will continue to have industry leading tools to manage their IT infrastructures. All this talk about simplifying IT really means something.

  Thanks for the kind words this morning Bob!

  Technorati Tags: Microsoft,management summit,system center,openmanage,Dell,server management,infrastructure management
  digg del.icio.us email this 5 comment(s)

• Visit the Server Room and Give Blood

  Fri. Apr. 18, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

  This post also appears here on the Storage@Work blog. 

  The Server Room has to be one of the best forums I've seen.  So if Dell EqualLogic people go there, lets make sure we don't trash it. Put the Name Dell in your sign on to avoid being poachers and don't pimp our stuff.  It's fine to talk about experiences and what we know and all that, but its a tech forum not a drop box for hype - perbole.

  And the rest of you too.  Do your thing and back up your blood type. Somebody might need it for the ultimate restore. 

  Format: flv Duration: 02:45

  Downloads WMV  MP4  OGG

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• FCoE is Good, but iSCSI’s Still Better...

  Wed. Apr. 16, 2008
  by travis_vigil

  With all the vendor chatter on FCoE at SNW last week, you’d think that it’s poised to become the final protocol for unifying storage and networking. What about iSCSI? Dell’s acquisition of EqualLogic demonstrates our belief that iSCSI is an integral part of the solution for unified fabric in the data center. So, does the emergence of FCoE change that? Not at all.

  FCoE deserves respect as Ethernet’s successor to Fibre Channel (FC). FCoE acknowledges the dominant install base of Fibre Channel and also promises to consolidate LANs and SANs, which is especially valuable for blade server environments. With 10GbE FCoE, customers with 2 and 4 Gbps FC SANs can consolidate their network infrastructures and reduce the number of ports and cables that need managing. Their investment in FC management software and skills is also protected.

  But FCoE needs to be put in perspective. Approximately ½ of the storage capacity shipped each year is still server-resident or external DAS and many SMBs (and enterprise departments) have yet to deploy SANs. For this wave of new SAN deployments, including many application-based deployments where customers already have some FC installed, iSCSI is better. This perspective is gaining traction and has been echoed in recent posts by Matt Baker and Dante Malagrino.  Why?

  · iSCSI is better for virtualization

  · iSCSI is also better for Disaster Recovery because it is built on TCP, is routable and therefore enables less complex, easier to implement DR deployments.

  · FCoE requires new, unique equipment, iSCSI does not:

  · iSCSI runs over any industry standard Ethernet switches. FCoE will require 1) 10GbE DCE-capable switches between the host storage and 2) the addition of an FCoE bridge (or switch with integrated FCoE bridge).

  · iSCSI runs on standard Ethernet adapters. For Windows, FCoE will require customers to buy a 10GbE Converged Network Adapter (CNA) for FCoE and LAN traffic. CNAs are forecast to be higher cost than standard 10Gbps Ethernet Adapters/LOMs and even 10Gbps iSCSI HBAs. I’ll save the discussion about the performance impacts of 10Gbps iSCSI (HBAs, TOEs, SW) vs. FCoE for a later date.

  · Since network bandwidth is rarely the performance bottleneck in storage networks iSCSI can run on less expensive 1 GbE, while FCoE only runs on 10GbE.  For many deployments, this forces customers to pay for bandwidth they don’t need.

  · And finally, FCoE is built on two new and untested technologies (DCE and FCoE). It will take years of testing and qualification to build ultimate acceptance. Storage customers have demonstrated themselves to be among the most conservative in the IT community.

  I agree with the FCoE proponents that maintaining separate networks for storage and networking is complex and inefficient. FCoE is commendable for providing the installed base of FC with an answer to cable sprawl and dedicated infrastructure. But the fact remains; the only technology that allows you to (affordably) unify your storage and network today is iSCSI. The only technology that provides compelling functionality benefits for DR and Virtualization is iSCSI. If you’re deploying a SAN for the first time or even if you are a Fibre Channel shop interested in the network consolidation and cost benefits of FCoE, why wait?

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• More on this FCoE thing

  Mon. Apr. 14, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

  This FCoE thing is probably going to last for some time as a difference of opinions and perspectives. For those who wished I had kept my mouth shut (or keyboard locked), I was probably a little nastier a year ago with this post on my Storage @ Work blog.  Being a CREATURE OF HABIT,  I responded to last week's news from SNW with my usual open-minded and fair approach. 
  

  Having said these snide things about FCoE, I am quite sure that it actually will be an excellent solution for lots of FC customers that need a migration path onto something less mortal than Fibre Channel.   The move to Ethernet-based SANs struck me as an obvious evolution a long time ago, after I heard the first FC bigot explain that FC was a channel and Ethernet was a network.  So I guess I shouldn't be too hard on FCoE, because it is a move in the right direction. Being an iSCSI technology bigot, it just seems like a unnecessary, cumbersome step, but to be fair, I tend to see the world through medium-sized business glasses.
  

  I believe that most of the concerns people have had with iSCSI are based on the implementations that are available. They either don't exploit the iSCSI standard very well or they do not scale up to be a good fit for large-scale data processing.  I'm not buying the protocol arguments for FCoE. At the end of the day, I believe the brute force power of 10Gb Ethernet will be sufficient for iSCSI and that I would rather deal with the rare tuning problems that occur than the crushed-veggie-juice-on-papyrus methods of managing storage in an FC SAN.  I know Greg Ferro (see his comment on Dante's post)  agrees.

  So where the heck do I stand today?  FCoE is as imperfect as FC, but it gets people headed where they need to be, which is Ethernet - and a lot better than FC.  There are going to be situations where taking a leap of faith to iSCSI is going to be a bit like riding a zipline.  You know its safe, but you don't want to attempt too much all at once.
  

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• Blades @ Dell: Should we listen to customers or competitors?

  Fri. Apr. 11, 2008
  by Aaron Hanson, Sr. Manager—PowerEdge Server Team

  Our new M-Series Blades are getting noticed. Maybe it’s because we’re trying very hard to listen. Customers tell us that blading (is that a verb?) a data center isn’t a strategy, but it is a viable technology solution for power, space, cooling management, and performance requirements. More precisely they tell us they want blades that are modular and can be easily re-purposed as their needs change. Competitive blade offerings are designed for specific workloads with a small set of configuration options for memory and processor upgrades, but they don’t address infrastructure changes such as new network interfaces (10 Gig Ethernet) and switch architectures.

  Independent analysts like what they see. Gartner said our “positioning of its blade servers also differentiates it from competitors… Dell supports the premise that blades, racks and towers all demonstrate specific market competencies; it believes that, in the coming years, there will be room for all three. This premise is consistent with Gartner's view of the market.” You can also read what InfoWorld, BladeWatch and The Register said.

  Change is inevitable. The M-Series adapts to it with modular snap-in flexibility down to the switch interconnects. If you need to add more I/O bandwidth or want to upgrade your switches you can add upgrade modules to the M-Series on the fly. That’s the sort of simplicity our customers demand. They also want simple management of blade components. We’ve responded with the most efficient, greenest, lead-free, and fastest-to-deploy blades on the planet. Listen to a podcast describing it in more detail.

  We are trying to do the things that matter most to our customers. It’s our strategy and we are sticking with it.

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• Its not really about FCoE VS iSCSI

  Fri. Apr. 11, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

   To me, its about FCoE, period.  My guess is that Jerome Wendt feels the same way. Here's a quote from his post today:

  So to avert this, my guess is that the FC vendors concocted a plan: Use FCoE to connect all enterprise servers, get a few analysts on board to endorse the idea and then convince end-users to take their eyes off the longer term ramifications of using FCoE. By getting enterprise users to bite on FCoE and spend the next few years connecting their remaining 85% of their servers to  existing FC SANs, users are locked into FC for the next 10 years until the next disruptive technology comes along.

  Now, I don't necessarily agree with everything Jerome says in his article, but I do think that FCoE is more vendor driven, than market driven.  Yes, there are certainly customers that want FC to live on because they have invested in it.  Its a royal pain to realize your architecture is hitting the wall.  Jerome likes InfiniBand a lot.  I might like it more if there was more of a critical mass to support it.  If I was concerned about FC becoming and-of-life, I probably wouldn't jump to the next dead end.
  

  Dante Malagrino from Cisco says he thinks it is about Data Center Ethernet in this post.   I suppose it is entirely possible that I agree with him but am too bullheaded to realize it.  I have always thought it was about Ethernet and making storage as manageable and efficient as possible over Ethernet.  I just don't buy the "we need something better than iSCSI" argument.  Its not like there are so many wonderful iSCSI implementations out there.  EqualLogic was able to break through a crowded industry mostly because existing vendors were "dogging it" with iSCSI.  Why would they willfully undermine their FC gracy train product lines?  Not until a threat emerged anyway.  FCoE is a great way for them to change the game. 

  I've been wrong before and (maybe) I'll be wrong again.  Maybe Matt Baker has it right.  I'll probably stay stubborn until I see the reality of FCoE, then I will either have to eat a pile of crow or I'll continue to hold the line.  That said, I doubt my opinion on the matter will ever change for SMB customers.  FCoE will be overkill for them.
  

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• FCoE is a great dead end

  Thu. Apr. 10, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

  Since coming to Dell from EqualLogic, I've been trying to figure out the lay of the land.  You know, what's the new politically correct thing to say and all that. I want to make the Inside IT blog work and I'd rather not start a bunch of problems with new co-workers. But, I've been a bit soft lately as a result and that's not good.

  So, here's what I think about FCoE.  Its about as stupid as a technology could be. Vendors making it just want to generate higher margins with a new technology.  They want you to think its going to be better than the alternatives because they will be able to charge more for it. That's how it is with all new technologies.  The discussions about network performance are hogwash. There will be more expensive surprises and more technical frustrations than native Fibre Channel has had.  How big is your budget for FCoE professional services?  Better start saving for it now.
  

  Furthermore, I don't believe the convergence arguments for FCoE are valid. Do storage administrators really think merging storage and data networks is a good idea? Even for iSCSI networks, I believe the best practice is to keep storage and data networks separate.  They are both mission critical and putting them together only increases the likelihood that problems with one will negatively impact the other. 

  If you already have Fibre Channel you have to check it out as a professional responsibility, but my recommendation is to be skeptical until FCoE shows proven bottom line benefits.

  digg del.icio.us email this 2 comment(s)

• Come and Get Your Windows Server 2008

  Fri. Apr. 04, 2008
  by Jeff Johnson, Enterprise Strategist

  We have been working closely with Microsoft for over two years on Windows Server 2008, and you will soon be able to get your hands on it.  Windows Server 2008 is a major milestone. We’ve done a lot of work with it to make sure it runs greener on Dell servers, combining the most flexibility with superior ease of use for our customers.   We think you'll find Windows Server 2008 to be a feature rich product.

  Were going to start shipping English language versions of Windows Server 2008 to customers in North America a week from today - Friday April 11. On Monday April 14, they will be available in Europe and Asia/Pacific/Japan. To streamline your installation it can be ordered pre-installed on Dell PowerEdge servers. FWIW, this includes all editions, from the Web Server Edition to the Datacenter Edition.  All orders are tested, validated,  and pre-installed across our PowerEdge server line to meet your requirements. 

  We have lots of experience with Windows Server 2008, and we can help you use it to simplify your IT operations. Our validated and repeatable migration services were built upon our Longhorn Early Adopter Program (LEAP).  This link takes you to a page of case studies so you can read how others have worked with us on this program.  Our goal, as always is to make the process of migration as straightforward as possible.

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)

• Eric Schott on iSCSI/Fibre Channel coexistence

  Fri. Apr. 04, 2008
  by Marc Farley, Inside IT Lead Blogger

  This entry first appeared on my Storage@ Work blog, here.

  Questions about the future of both iSCSI and Fibre Channel. are popular with analysts and the press. Eric Schott, Director of Product Management gives his opinions in the interview below, which was filmed by UberPulse.

  Many readers will likely be surprised by what he has to say, although to me it just demonstrates the kind of clear, realistic thinking he always has. If you want to catch Eric in person, he will be presenting at SNW next Wednesday. Here is a link to a description of his presentation.

  Format: flv Duration: 01:37

  Downloads WMV  MP4  OGG

  digg del.icio.us email this 0 comment(s)