Dec Network Evolution

8/2/2019 Dec Network Evolution

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dec-network-evolution 1/35

d e c e m b e r 2 0 1 1 / v o l . 2 / n 0 . 6

evolution

Network

b u i l d i n g t h e i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t o e n a b l e t h e c h a n g i n g f a c e o f i t

the reality CheCk issueIn this end-of-year issue, we take stock of what we reportedover the year and gauge whether the changes in technology

that we predicted have actually taken place.

Y o u w i

l l m o v e

t o a f l a t

d a t a

c e n t e r

.



W OneFab, newokng o aa ene mob w nee be e same

agan. Bease now o an aomaa poson e newok om oe

o ege. Manage om a snge pane o gass. See , no mae wa

ee peope bng w em. An eae a onfen, sabe, see

newok. Now o an make eeone app. Espea o.

Want to learn more?

Fo moe nomaon, a Eneass Newoks o ee a 1-877-801-7082,

o +1-978-684-1000 an s s on e Web a onefabric.net

viSiBility ANd SEcurity With

ONEFABric™ FrOM ENtErASyS

GEOrGE MASON uNivErSity

tme o cange e Blades on yo

Network?



network evolution e-zine • december 2011 3

hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the

edge iS here; end-t-end StrategieS

are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

a blog post by rivka gewirtz little

Can yr WLANkeep p with thetablet explsin?

research firm Canalys reports that

the enterprise wireless LAN market

has grown by 35% due to the inux o

wireless-only devices. I could report

this as good news—and it is or the

top fve WLAN vendors: Cisco, Meru,Motorola, HP and Aruba. But or net-

work managers, the numbers should

signal a dierent message: You’d bet-

ter shake a leg i you don’t already have

a plan in place to grow your WLAN to

handle the tablet and smartphone storm.

I your mobility plan is centered

around halting or even limiting the

inux o personal devices on your net-

work, think again. BYOD programs are

imminent. What’s more, i you believe

that the WLAN is a secondary network

built to provide Internet access in com-

mon spaces, it’s time to rethink your

wireless strategy. The same Canalys

report notes that tablet shipments

will grow to more than 113 million in

2015 rom 45 million units in 2011, and

smartphone shipments will increase to

864 million rom 455 million units in

the same period. Once these wireless-

only devices ood the enterprise, the

WLAN will either handle them—or

completely melt down.

But building a mobility program goes

urther than fnding the right mobile

device management tool. It is just as

important to build a secured WLAN

with the capacity to handle bandwidth-hungry applications such as video

and VoIP. As Jared Grifth, CTO o

systems integrator Cinergy explains:

“It’s about protecting mission-critical

applications. That comes down to

good old-ashioned wireless LAN engi-

neering,” he said. “When I build this

network, I have to build it based on the

applications that are going to be on the

network, not or coverage. I you build

a network or coverage and then add

50 devices to it, it slows the network

down, i not crashing it completely.”

What’s your plan? n

rivka gewirtz little is the Senior Site Editor

f tta n ma.

idealabWhere evlving netwrk cncepts cme tgether

http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/smart-phones-and-pads-fuel-wireless-lan-growth







hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

a blog post by ivaN pepelNjak

Myth VM mbility

and llw-the-sndata centers

after i made a particu-

larly snarky comment

about an article that

touted inter-data-center

VM mobility as the ulti-

mate tool to reach the

100% availability heavens (this is why

that argument is totally invalid), some-

one asked me why I don’t believe in

workload mobility, disaster avoidance

and ollow-the-sun data centers. I am

positive that some businesses have

the need or all three, but live VM migra-

tion isn’t the right tool or any o them.

Let’s ocus on the most bizarre o

the three ideas: using VM mobility toimplement ollow-the-sun data cen-

ters. The underlying business require-

ments are sound and simple—moving

the servers closer to end users reduces

latency and long-distance bandwidth

requirements. However, you can-

not reach this goal by moving virtual

machines around data centers; you

simply can’t move a running virtual

machine over long-enough distances.

The maximum round-trip latency

supported by vSphere 4.0 is 5 msec.

While the timing requirements have

been relaxed a bit in vSphere 5.0, the

maximum round-trip latency is still 10

msec—way too low to implement the

ollow-the-sun model. Ater all, you

need more than 100 msec to get rom

Central Europe to Ireland, let alone

across the Atlantic.Even i you were able to move a run-

ning VM between continents, you’d

still ace a number o other challenges.

Bridging over such distances is out o

question; most layer-2 protocols (like

ARP) would time out when aced with

round-trip delays measured in hun-

dreds o milliseconds. You might be

able to support the VM mobility with

LISP, but even that approach has a

number o drawbacks until someone

implements LISP within hypervisor sot

switches.

So, is it impossible to implement

ollow-the-sun data centers? O course

not. The Googles o the world solved

the problem more than a decade ago

using DNS-based load balancing (or

anycast) between data centers andlocal load balancing within the data

center. You can also use Amazon’s

EC2 cloud and create elastic resources

based on geographic load distribution.

Both approaches do have one thing in

common: they rely on properly archi-

tected scale-out applications.

In short, i would be nice i some o

the high-level consultants took some

time to check product data sheets and

laws o physics (like the speed o light)

beore selling totally impractical mar-

ketectures, but I don’t expect that to

happen any time soon. n

Ia Pplja, ccie n. 1354, s a 25-a

a f s.

http://blog.ioshints.info/2011/08/high-availability-fallacies.html






The legacy approach to networking in the data center - stackingswitches as far as the eye can see, will never meet today’s data

center demands.

The solution isn’t about adding another switch, it’s about an

entirely new approach to networking.

To learn more, visit juniper.net/connect




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

expert adviCe from lisa phifer

Navigating celllar

vs. Wi-Fi

Q: How do we make the cellular vs.

Wi-Fi decision for connecting enterprise

mobile devices?

a: Cellular (3G/4G) data networks are

ideal or on-the-go connectivity over

a wide area. However, we’ve all expe-

rienced weak cellular signal indoors,

which can cause slow or dropped data

connections. Although outdoor Wi-Fi

networks are available in some areas,

most Wi-Fi hotspots are designed to

cover a well-defned indoor space,

such as a hotel, conerence center, air-

port or airplane.

As such, decisions about cellular

vs. Wi-Fi depend frst on location and

mobility. Increasingly, we will connectwireless devices to both network types

and we may even roam automatically

between them. By deault, most smart-

phones preer using Wi-Fi, alling back

to cellular only when Wi-Fi is discon-

nected.

However, employers may want to

exert a wireless connection control

plan. IEEE 802.11u amends the stan-

dard implemented by Wi-Fi clients

to acilitate cellular/hotspot network

roaming. In a nutshell, 11u will let cli-

ents discover Wi-Fi hotspots, learn

about the services they oer, and

transparently authenticate themselves

based on agreements between net-

work operators. User preerences and

IT-confgured policies are expected to

play a role in this.

Although 11u should bring broaderinteroperability and transparency, pol-

icy control over wireless roaming isn’t

new. For years, cellular operators and

roaming Internet providers like iPass

have oered proprietary “connection

managers” that can enorce preerenc-

es and rules, such as auto-launching

a VPN tunnel when connecting to a

hotspot.

Typical corporate network restric-

tions might require an active VPN tun-

nel, a host frewall that blocks every-

thing else (including NetBIOS), and

recently updated anti-malware. I these

criteria are not met, Wi-Fi hotspot

connections may be disallowed, orc-

ing clients onto cellular—even when

doing so is slower or more expensive.

Corporate policies can also be used tocontain cost—or example, preventing

high-bandwidth applications rom con-

necting over cellular or blocking data

when roaming onto a oreign cellular

network.

These are just a ew examples o

corporate network restrictions placed

on wireless clients, based on net-

work type. There are many platorms

through which to defne and enorce

policy. But don’t start with a platorm—

start by defning policies that reect

business needs and risks. n

Lisa Pif s c cp i., a -

s spa s a

aa .




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

a blog post by shamus mCgilliCuddy

Is it time r RIM

t mve n rmBlackBerry?

sometimes it pays to

move on, no matter how

much you have invested

in something.

This summer Freako-

nomics Radio ran an episode titled

“The upside o quitting,” which poked

holes in the old adage “winners never

quit and quitters never win.” Many

people, the program argued, are unable

to recognize that they have committed

themselves to an endeavor that is ail-

ing. The more “sunk costs” someone

has in such an endeavor, the less likely

he or she is to give up on it. No matter

how hard it might be to admit it, some-times it pays to just walk away and try

something new.

And here we have Research In

Motion (RIM), inventor o the once

mighty BlackBerry, so popular a device

that users dubbed it the “CrackBerry.”

The BlackBerry was THE enterprise

mobility device o the pre-iPhone era.

A reliable platorm or mobile email,

contacts and calendars that oered

mobility managers centralized control

and rock-solid security, the BlackBerry

made RIM a tech superpower.

That era o dominance is over. The

ever-steepening decline o the Black-

Berry, along with recent disasters like

RIM’s global service outage, have a lot

o people writing RIM obituaries. It’s

prompted me to ask mysel: Is it time

or RIM to walk away rom the Black-Berry?

RIM was almost too successul with

the BlackBerry brand. The device is a

household name while no one aside

rom IT managers and tech media

know who RIM is. Mainstream market-

ing o any RIM device is pegged to the

BlackBerry brand, not RIM. RIM is a

BlackBerry company. What else can it

be?

We may fnd out the answer to that

question soon. Android and Apple

iOS devices have destroyed the Black-

Berry’s share o the consumer mobile

device market, and now it’s eating into

RIM’s sweet spot: Enterprise mobility.

Enterprise Management Associates

(EMA) just announced that more than

30% o large enterprises (10,000+

employees) who are current Black-

Berry users plan to migrate to a dier-

ent platorm within the next year. In its

press release, EMA said:

The BlackBerry wasTHE mbile device the pre-iPhneera and it madeResearch In Mtina tech sperpwer.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/freakonomics-radio/2011/jul/01/

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/freakonomics-radio/2011/jul/01/


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dec-network-evolution 8/35Technology Solutions That Fit Right Every Timwww.lilien.com

Ride the Wave Don’t let your network get pulled under by the surge in

mobile devices and multi-media. There’s no end in sight

for this tidal wave of wireless trac!

Does your network provide immediate, continuous access?

Do you have a favorable cost structure in place?Is your platform scalable and secure?

Look to Lilien to address your Networking needs. We’ll provide the expertise to update

your network, create the proper foundation for future growth, and develop your roadmap

Our Networking & Security practice oers:

• Recommendations based on business objectives, gap analysis, performance

assessment and ongoing optimization.

• Key services including device deployment policies, network access control,

wireless intrusion systems, e-commerce (PCI) remediation, penetration testing,

and intrusion detection/prevention.

• Broad expertise spanning load balanced e-commerce silos, secure wireless networksnetwork virtualization, public access projects, and business continuity platforms.

Ride the wave with Lilien, an HP Elite Partner.

Visit us at www.lilien.com or call 888-545-4361.




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

“This represents a signifcant reduc-

tion rom the platorm’s current domi-

nation o the large enterprise market

space with 52% o mobile device usersin that demographic actively using a

BlackBerry device as part o their job

unction.”

RIM’s mobility architecture remains

sound (despite the recent outage) but

the company has struggled to keep

pace with innovation in the device

market. When Apple upended the

smartphone industry with the iPhone

in 2007, RIM responded with the

BlackBerry Storm, an ill-ated try at a

touchscreen smartphone that ailed to

catch on.

Then Apple’s iPad blew up the

touchscreen tablet market and RIM

responded with the PlayBook, which

enjoyed strong early sales but got

panned by gadget reviewers who said

the sotware wasn’t ully baked. Theyalso questioned RIM’s requirement

that PlayBook users tether the tablet

to a BlackBerry via Bluetooth in order

to access native email and calendar

applications. A nice security eature or

enterprise IT, but ultimately limiting to

users who were already impressed by

the elegance o the iPad and some o

the better Android tablets. Amid news

that retailers were slashing PlayBook

prices in October, gadget bloggers

jumped on speculation by an invest-

ment analyst who suggested RIM had

given up on the device, a rumor that

RIM vehemently denied.

Then came October’s service out-

age which turned 70 million BlackBer-

rys into bricks or several days. This

has been a PR and customer service

disaster, which prompted publicationsto come up with cute headlines like

“RIM’s Outage: Nail in Cofn?” and

“Is Research In Motion the walking

dead?”

It’s clear that the BlackBerry is inserious decline. Does it pay or RIM

to stick it out and keep investing in it?

In a market where Windows Phone

7, Android and Apple iOS are all win-

ning over users, does it make sense

or RIM to evolve the BlackBerry OS

like this? We saw Palm try to do this

with WebOS. That didn’t go so well.

Nokia walked away rom Symbian and

embraced Windows Phone 7. Should

RIM walk away rom BlackBerry?

How would you do that…. give up on

the brand that defnes your company?

At this point, is it the BlackBerry user

experience that RIM can hang its hat

on? Or is it its middleware (BlackBerry

RIM’s mbilityarchitectreremains snd bt

the cmpany hasstrggled t keeppace with innvatinin the device market.




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

top 5 Network iNvestmeNts of 2011w f f s xp s s

x 12 s?

1 Wireless/Wi-Fi networks

2 iP p

3 n aa s a appas

4 LAN and access switching

5 Appa (wAn pa, appa aa & a aa)

Source: “networking PrioritieS Survey,” techtArget, inc., JAnuAry 2011, n=2190 i.t. mAnAgerS

Enterprise Server) and its network

operating centers (NOCs)? Is RIM’s

strength in its devices or its architec-

ture?Last May RIM announced that it

was extending BlackBerry Enterprise

Server support to Android and iOS

devices. Perhaps that’s where RIM’s

uture lies. Incorporate non-BlackBerry

devices into the architecture that won

the hearts and minds o IT managers

everywhere. Build value there. Sink

R&D into that, not the next-generation

BlackBerry. It’s not clear that going in

that direction will be enough. The mar-

ket or a mobility architecture might

not be as large as one or a hot, new

smartphone, but at least it’s a new

direction that might work. It’s just a

question o whether RIM wants to let

go o device that it has so much invest-

ed in. And BlackBerry needn’t give up

on devices, either. Instead, it could

develop Android or Windows devices

that are completely tied into the RIM

architecture? Can RIM do that? Does itwant to?

Sometimes it pays to quit. It doesn’t

have to mean deeat. It can mean that

you’ve decided to fght another battle

that you think you can win. n

Sams MGilli s ns d

f tta n ma gp.

Smetimes itpays t mve n,n matter hw mchy’ve invested in

smething.



Move up to MORE

Welcome to the next generationof mobile device management

Introducing BlackBerry® Mobile Fusion. Available early 2012,

BlackBerry Mobile Fusion brings together:

• Market-leading BlackBerry® Enterprise Server 5.0.3 management

capabilities for BlackBerry® smartphones

• New management capabilities for BlackBerry® PlayBook™ tablets

built on BlackBerry Enterprise Server technology

• Mobile device management for smartphones and tablets running

Android and iOS operating systems

BlackBerry Mobile Fusion will also support future generations

of BlackBerry operating systems.

© 2 0 1 1

R e s e a r c h I n M o t i o n L i m i t e d .

A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

B l a c k B e r r y ® , R I M ® ,

R e s e a r c h I n M o t i o n ® a n d r e l a t e d t r a d e m a r k s ,

n a m e s a n d

l o g o s a r e t h e p r o p e r t y o f R e s e a r c h I n

M o t i o n

L i m i t e d a n d a r e r e g i s t e r e d a n d / o r u s e d i n t h e U . S .

a n d c o u n t r i e s a r o u n d t h e w o r l d .

A l l o t h e r t r a d e m a r k s a r e t h e p r o p e r t y o f

t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o w n e r s .

www.blackberry.com/mobilefusion

Get the details

Join us for a free webcast where

our BlackBerry® experts will

help you understand how

BlackBerry Mobile Fusion will

change the way you manage

mobility within your

organization.




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

idea lab

Htspt 2.0 primer

hotspot 2.0 (hs 2.0) was developed by

the Wi-Fi Alliance and the WirelessBroadband Association to enable the

seamless hando o trafc between

cellular and Wi-Fi networks without

requiring additional user sign-on and

authentication. Over the years, various

vendors have developed technology

that automates hotspot log-on, but

these attempts have been ragmented

and are mostly not interoperable.

Hotspot 2.0 relies on the newly

approved IEEE 802.11u protocol to

enable communication between capa-

ble devices and access points (APs)

that allow or automated network dis-

covery, access authorization and provi-

sioning.

An 802.11u-capable mobile device

would locally store operator profles

and network preerence policy. Oncethis device fnds out an 802.11u-capa-

ble AP, it sends a query using Access

Network Query Protocol (ANQP)

seeking inormation about available

operators, roaming partners and EAP

authentication in the hotspot. The

802.11u AP would use Generic Adver-

tisement Service (GAS) to provide

Layer 2 transport o the advertise-

ment protocol rame between a mobile

device and a server in the carrier net-

work. The AP would then relay the

server’s response back to the device,

and i there’s a match, automatically

authenticate and connect the user.

The provisioning process also allows

or Quality o Service mapping, or

mapping between dierentiated ser-

vices code point (DSCP) markers to

over-the-air Layer 2 priority on a per-device basis, acilitating end-to-end

quality o service.

Why should enterprises care about

Hotspot 2.0?

Most enterprises are ocused on

building wireless LANs that can be

optimized to handle a storm o per-

sonal and corporate devices and be

optimized to deliver multiple multime-dia applications, including voice and

video. Yet as enterprises grapple with

handling the mobile device inux, they

are looking or ways to introduce sup-

portive cellular coverage inside the

campus. That would require seamless

roaming between Wi-Fi and 3G or 4G

networks. Additionally, enterprises

would like to extend their campus

Wi-Fi coverage to cellular networks so

that users can leave the ofce while

using an application and not lose con-

nection.

Hotspot 2.0 trials are underway and

Hotspot 2.0 certifcation test beds will

be available in 2012. —r g l

Enterprises arelking t intrdcespprtive celllarcverage inside thecamps.

http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/answer/Enterprise-wireless-connection-policy-Navigating-cellular-vs-WiFi

http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/answer/Enterprise-wireless-connection-policy-Navigating-cellular-vs-WiFi






hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

the reality check issue

the reality CheCk issueit’s easy for the IT press, analysts and even users to get caught up in vendor

marketing hype. We go to conerences and hear phrases like “at networks”

or “network convergence,” and suddenly every analyst report, article, blogand show-oor conversation centers on these topics. Whether they are

worth the discussion gets proven out over time.

Sometimes the buzz represents actual shits in technology, and we are

able to give our readers the basic inormation they need to consider their

next networking investment. Other times things go in a dierent direction.

In this end-o year Network Evolution eZine, we take stock o what we

reported over the year and gauge whether the changes in technology that

we predicted have actually taken place. Specifcally, we look at three o

the hottest topics o the year in networking: the move to a at data centernetwork, the realities o converged storage and data center networking, and

the concept o moving to a unifed wired and wireless network.

The good news is that all o these topics cover important technical chal-

lenges that our readers are still struggling to solve every day. But all o these

topics have also taken slightly dierent twists in their evolutions than we

expected. Here’s what we learned. n

Y o u w i

l l m o v e

t o a f

l a t d a

t a c e n

t e r .




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


editor reality check: In the rst quar-

ter o this year, our Network Evolution

eZine reported that enterprises were

poised to deploy fat data center net-

works. Most network equipment ven-

dors were “working toward executing

their proessed visions.” What have weound almost a year later? Vendors are

releasing products, but network engi-

neers interested in the technology ace

lengthy trials and proo-o-concept

processes. For now, it appears that

engineers will take incremental steps

to change their network topologies

and many will only go partially fat.

NetworkiNg veNdors have been talk-

ing at networks ever since vir-

tualization began stretching the

limits o legacy data center network

architecture. Network engineers are

listening, but they have been slow

to ully invest in such wholesale

change.

Conceptually, attening the net-

work means moving away rom

the use o spanning tree and a

three-tier architecture that is opti-

mized or the north-south trafco a client-server data center para-

digm. Experts say that virtualization

demands large Layer 2 domains

with low latency, any-to-any server

connectivity.

This year almost every traditional

networking vendor rolled out at

data center abric strategies.

Despite the 18 months o mar-

keting buzz that preceded these

rollouts, general availability o the

end-to-end architecture rom these

vendors is just now hitting the mar-

ket, and it’s difcult to fnd custom-

ers who have actually bought in. We

asked Cisco, Juniper, Brocade, Dell

are we fiNally iNthe age of the flatNetwork? sort ofMany engineers agree that data center netwrk tplgymst change in rder t spprt virtalizatin, bt it’sging t take a lt testing bere mst jmp int a at

netwrk.by rivka gewirtz little aNd shamus mCgilliCuddy




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


Force10, Avaya and Alcatel-Lucent

to connect us with customers who

have implemented at data center

networks or who are even trialingthe technology, but only Brocade

was able to produce a reerence

customer by press time.

This is a challenge to the industry

considering that vendors need re-

erence customers to demonstrate

a track record o success and to

convince the majority o data center

network architects to revolutionize

their network topology.

“I hear a lot o people talk about

[at networks], but I haven’t seen

a lot o people doing it,” said Mark

Thiele, executive vice president or

data center technology at Switch, a

Las Vegas-based data center colo-

cation and cloud services company.

“People are nervous about doing

anything to these environments thatmight introduce risk.”

Thiele, who is also ounder and

president o the non-proft data cen-

ter industry community Data Center

Pulse, said he has talked to only two

people who are even in the proo o

concept stage with at networks,

both with Juniper’s QFabric.

He estimated that only 1 to 5%

o companies will have at data

center networks in production next

year, with another 5 to 10% in the

proo o concept stage. The quickest

adoption will come rom companies

that have the most to gain, such as

those that are building large-scale

inrastructure, especially massive

Web-acing companies like social

media sites and online gaming com-

panies.

ArchItectS wILL ALter

ArchItecture A LIttLe bIt

At A tIMe

The slow uptake o at networks

and data center abrics is nothing

more than the normal adoption

cycle, according to Vince Con-

roy, CTO or FusionStorm, a Cisco

channel partner that specializes in

enterprise data center solutions and

managed services. Customers, he

said, will take baby steps to chang-

ing their networking architecture

frst.

FusionStorm has worked with

many clients in deploying the frst

phase o Cisco’s Unifed Fabricarchitecture, which consists o

Nexus 5000 switches aggregating

pods o Cisco’s Unifed Computing

System server chassis.

“Customers are tending to start

more at the access layer. They want

to converge [storage and data] ab-

ric at the access layer today,” Con-

roy said. Adopting large, at Layer 2

domains will be secondary.

FusionStorm has deployed this

technology within its own data cen-

ter. The solution provider is slowly

expanding its use o these technolo-

gies within a larger legacy inra-

structure that includes an aggrega-






hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


tion layer and core consisting o

Cisco’s Catalyst 6500 switches.

The next step or FusionStorm and

or many o its clients is to imple-ment a large, at Layer 2 domain

within the data center network

using Nexus 7000 switches and

technologies such as Cisco’s TRILL-

based FabricPath, he said.

FLAt networkS cALL

For extenSIve teStInG

And new deSIGn SkILLS

Engineers are fnding that imple-

menting network abrics and large

Layer 2 domains requires extensive

planning and testing.

FusionStorm will test several spe-

cifc actors in its evaluation o a

at, Layer 2 network.

“We’re going to be looking or

No.1, manageability and security,because in our particular case, we

need the ability to segment cus-

tomer environments since we’re

doing hosted clouds or custom-

ers. Whether it is ully dedicated

or multi-tenant clouds, we need to

have a certain level o security that

we can demonstrate to our custom-

ers,” said Conroy. “We’re also look-

ing or the ability to do automated

provisioning.”

Over the past several months,

Aamir Lakhani, a network architect

with a large consulting frm, has

been helping his clients—including

several global fnancial frms, gov-

ernment agencies, ISPs and large

media companies—test out QFab-

ric.

“Some have expanded out theirproo o concept because they want

to do their due diligence with other

vendors that are coming out with

[at networks]. Cisco [or example]

just announced the new Nexus

3000s and changes to FabricPath,

which enables large, at networks.”But they also realize that a at

network isn’t a product that you can

simply drop into a data center and

hit the “on” switch. Network engi-

neers have a lot o work to do, and

need a lot o help beore they can

put these new architectures into

production, Lakhani said.

“They’re buying into it, and they

might be buying the products that

are labeled at networks, but they

lack the knowledge o how to archi-

tect it and design it rom the ground

up. You can’t just buy QFabric or

FabricPath and have a at network.

It takes a lot o up-ront planning.

Engineers are fnd-ing that implementing

netwrk abrics andlarge Layer 2 dmainsreqires extensiveplanning and testing.




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


With some large data centers, it

takes 30 to 90 days o planning—

architecture and design work—to

make sure these data centers willsupport a at network.”

Lakhani’s clients are testing

QFabric or the quality o its core

sotware and manageability. QFab-

ric promises customers the ability to

manage hundreds o discrete devic-

es as a single logical entity. Many o

Lakhani’s customers doubted that

this was possible, so they’re push-

ing the management capabilities o

QFabric hard.

“More importantly, they want to

make sure [QFabric] is not dropping

packets,” Lakhani said. Overall, he

estimates that his customers who

are trialing QFabric are seeing a

20% increase in perormance over

legacy architecture rom Juniper,

Cisco and other vendors.

the SeMI-FLAt network

IS More oF A reALIty

Flemish media company De Pers-

groep has opted or a semi-at—or

two-tiered network—as opposed to

going completely at, a course that

most customers will ollow in the

beginning.

Through mergers and acquisi-

tions, De Persgroep quadrupled in

size over the last fve years, and

the swelling numbers o users and

applications ar surpassed the

capacity and available ports on its

Cisco-based data center LAN. That

led Wim Vanhoo , the company’s

inrastructure manager, to seek net-

work alternatives that would bring10 Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) through-

out the data center and enable

Layer 2 networking across the com-

pany’s two data centers. Vanhoo

opted to use Brocade’s VDX switch-

es and abric technology.

The company replaced its tradi-

tional distributed network with a

top-o-rack design that could more

easily work into a data center abric

and eliminate one layer o the net-

work topology.

“With a top-o-rack topology,

we have servers in each rack, and

instead o a patch panel, you have

only two cables rom each switch to

your central switch” said Vanhoo.

That brought 10 GbE into each rack,

he said, and with each server havingtwo switch connections in the rack,

it also introduced high availability

redundancy.

Vanhoo’s top-o-rack confgu-

ration consists o Brocade VDX

switches that use sel-discovery and

sel-confguration to fnd each other

and orm a abric or virtual chassis

that tie directly into the aggregation

layer. That eliminates the distribu-

tion layer, in what Vanhoo calls a

mixture o at network and span-

ning tree design. Yet getting rid o

even one layer o the network had

two very notable outcomes:

“With a at network, there are




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


multiple channels [o connectivity]

so the load is spread,” said Vanhoo,

explaining why there is now more

capacity and better perormance.In addition, Vanhoo can now

push trafc rom these enmeshed

switches directly into Layer 2, net-

working between racks and even

between De Persgroep’s two data

centers.

“Beore everything had to go

across Layer 3, but now that it goes

across Layer 2, it’s very ast,” said

Vanhoo.

From a network management

perspective, Brocade’s abric

switches can be handled as one vir-

tual switch, eliminating some o the

issues that engineers generally have

when processing is moved rom a

central location throughout many

racks.

new ALternAtIveS to

dAtA center FAbrIcS eMerGe

While networking vendors went

on a attening renzy this year, I/O

virtualization technology providers,

such as Xsigo, have come up with

their own take on any-to-any server

connectivity by creating server ab-

ric technology.

Last summer, Xsigo announced

a new IP-based data center server

abric solution built on top o its

original I/O Director top-o-rack

device, which virtualizes the stor-

age and network connections or

servers. Server administrators

can plug servers with standard 10

GbE NICs or 40 Gigabit InfniBand

NICs directly into the I/O Director.Through Xsigo sotware, the server

administrator can then assign net-

work and storage connections via

those NICs to physical servers andthe virtual machines that operate on

them.

While network abrics require

network administrators to establish

and manage server-to-server tra-

fc, server abrics place this power

directly in the hands o server and

virtualization administrators. Once

this server-to-server trafc is no

longer visible to the Ethernet net-

work, it will eliminate the need or

network administrators to manage

virtual machines with VLANs.

For now, because the technology

is so new, it’s not likely to throw a

wrench in the plans o engineers

“Bere everythinghad t g acrssLayer 3, bt nw thatit ges acrss Layer2, it’s very ast.”—WIM VANHooF

infrastructure manager,

De Persgroep




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


who are already considering a

change in network architecture—

but that could change over time.

“So much o the industry isocused on network abrics, but we

haven’t seen mainstream computer

vendors adopt server abrics yet,”

said ZK Research analyst Zeus Ker-

ravala. “You need the support o an

HP or IBM [or wide-scale uptake].”

That said, as IT organization silos

come down and data center tech-

nology gets rolled into a combined

group o networking, compute and

storage experts, they may together

begin to look at server abric as a

real alternative i it’s easier to work

with, Kerravala added.

FLAt networkS:

A LonG Peer revIew LIeS AheAd

Vendors will continue to evange-lize at data center networks, and

enterprises will listen. But adopting

these new technologies is not trivial.

Network engineers are evaluating

the technology, but they are also

waiting or someone else to be the

guinea pig.

“Customers are a little slow to

adopt new architectures until they

see their peers beginning to do it,”

Conroy said.

Bear in mind that rereshing a

data center network is never easy to

begin with. Adopting a new archi-tecture just makes the process more

daunting, especially since most

enterprises aren’t willing or able toput other technology investments

on hold while proving out a new net-

work.

“Consider how much trouble it is

to get a major, large-scale applica-

tion launched,” Thiele said. “Then

imagine how people will react i you

say, ‘By the way, while we’re launch-

ing this application, we want to put

in a major new network strategy.’” n

“S mch theindstry is csedn netwrk abrics,bt we haven’t seen

mainstream cm-pter vendrs adptserver abrics yet.”—ZEuS KERRAVALA

analyst, ZK Research



Network effect

Rely on Cisco® to provide the industry’s widest breadth of products

to build a network to meet your specic business needs.

Tried and tested globally, deployed by leading companies of every

size, a Cisco network has the potential to transform your business.

For more information, contact your Certied Cisco Provider.

The right network changes everything.

Cash Back& FinancingAvailable*

2011 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

* Get cash back incentives on select Cisco products.

3% nancing available. See web site for complete details.

www.cisco.com/go/rightnetwork




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


editor’s reality check: Throughout

the year, we’ve reported that wireless

networks are nally reliable enough

or mission-critical enterprise use.We’ve also heard hints that they could

even replace wired networks. But here

we learn that mission-critical doesn’t

mean replacement; it means wired

and wireless network unication.

let’s face it: The wireless LAN as an

overlay is dead.

But wait—that doesn’t mean

there’s any truth to the buzz around

replacing wired networks with wire-

less. In act, such substitution only

really occurs at the edge o the LAN.

Ater all, it takes tons o wire to

implement wireless. Even in a wire-

less network, there must be inter-

connect and backhaul or all those

access points, and, o course, or

connectivity as we get closer to thecore.

What’s more o a reality, how-

ever, is the unifcation o wireless

and wired LANs through a common

management platorm with one

console, operating o o the same

management databases. We’re not

all the way there yet, but we’re get-

ting closer all the time.

By uniying network management,

engineers can reduce operating

expense, a key element—along with

capital expense—in computing total

cost o ownership. A single view o

everything going on in the network

rom a common—and possibly

CaN eNterprise

wireless laNsreplaCe wired Net-works? Not quiteThe nifcatin wireless and wired LANs allwsnetwrking teams t cnslidate capital expenditresand simpliy peratins by treating the Ethernet and wirelessLAN netwrks as a single nifed inrastrctre with anintegrated management platrm. by Craig j. mathias




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


mobile—console means that net-

work operations sta can be more

efcient and productive. What’s

more, unifed databases or security,logging, reporting and compliance

add to the reliability o mission-

critical LANs.

Both network hardware and

management sotware vendors are

increasingly responding to this need

or a unifed solution. While it’s not

reasonable to expect that any arbi-

trary element o a network rom any

given vendor can be transparently

integrated into a unifed networking

solution, each new upgrade instal-

lation brings more components that

are 10 Gbps and above and open or

integration into a unifed manage-

ment solution.

While vendors are already ocus-

ing on unifed network solutions,

the emergence o new managementsystem standards based on XML

will emerge and better defne the

path or users and vendors.

In the meantime, it’s important to

note that unifed networking in no

way necessarily compromises the

undamental interoperability upon

which we’ve all built our networks

over the years.

When unifed networking

becomes universal, we’ll see lower

operational costs, higher productiv-ity, better integrated security, great-

er reliability, improved uniormity o

services, easier growth and scalabil-

ity and much more.

We’ll see a ew bumps along the

road, but i unifed networking is

not already in your strategic plans,

now’s the time to consider change. n

When nifed net-wrking becmesniversal, we’ll seelwer peratinal

csts, higher pr-dctivity, better in-tegrated secrity,greater reliability,imprved nirmity services, easiergrwth and scalability.



Access time-saving technical tips, independent expert advice, checklists andtutorials, along with webcasts, white papers, newsletters and more - all for free!

We also have half-day and full-day seminars, multi-day conferences, and dinnerevents coming to a city near you, as well as virtual shows you can view from thecomfort of your desktop. Topics covered include: unified communications, WANoptimization, network management and more. View our full 2010-2011 scheduleat: events.techtarget.com

Your One Stop Shop for All Things Networking

Nowhere else will you find such ahighly targeted combination of

resources specifically dedicated to thesuccess of today’s IT-networking andservice provider professionals. Free.

http://www.events.techtarget.com/

http://www.events.techtarget.com/




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


editor’s reality check: Networking

vendors may promise that end-to-end

Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) is

ready or prime time, but users are still

largely torn. FCoE supporters say that

IT shops can start with the technologyat the edge, but very soon convergence

will occur throughout every rack. Yet

disbelievers say that Ethernet is not

nearly reliable enough or storage tra-

c and that running end-to-end FCoE

requires way too much engineering.

In this point-counterpoint eature,

two storage and networking experts,

Stuart Miniman o the technology

orum Wikibon and Stephen Foskett o

Gestalt IT and Tech Field Day, take on

the issue rom opposing views. Read

both and see which side you support.

cios have a huge challenge in the

ace o explosive growth in data

and applications: They must control

not only the cost o IT inrastruc-

ture, but also deal with diminish-

ing power and space availability.

What does that mean or IT shops?It means the need to look at un-

damental architectural changes,

including the convergence o stor-

age and networks. Fibre Channel

over Ethernet (FCoE) is fnally ready

to meet that challenge—frst at the

edge but very soon in the rack.

The IT community has worked

or decades to deliver a single net-

work or all inrastructures, but

specifc application requirements

have spawned the development

and adoption o multiple networks,

including Ethernet or general net-

working, Fibre Channel (FC) as

the primary storage network and

fCe at the edgeis here; eNd-to-eNdstrategies areimmiNeNtWith 10 GbE, data center bridging and FCE-ready

switches and adapters shipping, the nly qestin letis this: Why nt cnverge? by stuart miNimaN




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


InfniBand or low latency and high-

perormance computing (HPC)

environments.

Yet this can change. With thegeneral adoption o 10 Gigabit Eth-

ernet (GbE) across enterprise data

centers and the emergence o data

center bridging (DCB), convergence

to Ethernet as a single network is

now viable. An added advantage

is that DCB gives administrators

the knobs to deliver Quality o Ser-

vice (QoS) or all trafc—including

general LAN trafc, plus storage

options like iSCSI and FCoE—over a

single network.While neither FC nor

InfniBand are likely to disappear in

the next fve years, new or expand-

ed data centers should give strong

consideration to converging on an

all-Ethernet environment starting at

the edge.

For FC customers, FCoE is apath toward converged network-

ing. The standard or FCoE was

ratifed in 2009 and a broad spec-

trum o products have been deliv-

ered—including those rom Cisco,

Brocade, Intel, HP, NetApp, EMC,

Juniper, Dell and others. Adoption

today is predominately in embed-

ded solutions, such as blade serv-

ers, that are at the server-edge o

the data center. This is the natural

progression o technology adop-

tion, especially in the risk-adverse

storage world. FCoE at the edge is

a simple deployment with a simple

fnancial justifcation.

But FCoE won’t stop at the edge.

Adoption is expected to increase in

rack and stack servers. While serv-ers and storage that support FCoE

have been around or over a year,

multi-hop FCoE confgurations only

started shipping a ew months ago.

Multi-hop solutions ace chal-

lenges in that despite conorming

to the standard, architectures vary

greatly among vendors. Yet this

does not mean that there are sta-

bility issues; rather it means that

some o the same switch-to-switch

interoperability challenges seen in

FC will carry over to FCoE. FC cus-

tomers typically standardize on a

single vendor, and FCoE switches do

have broad interoperability support

with host adapters, storage arrays

and FC switches.

While no storage administratorclamors or a new protocol, there is

no need to ear FCoE, which is built

with much o the same architec-

ture as FC. As more o a company’s

switches and adapters are “conver-

gence-ready”—both Ethernet ports

that can support FCoE and FC ports

that can change personality to Eth-

ernet/FCoE—there will be increased

pressure rom management to

move toward a single network. The

good news with FCoE is that storage

knowledge doesn’t go away with

a move to an all-Ethernet environ-

ment. n



http://www.hpmnetworks.com/




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


all year i have watched storage and

networking vendors twisting and

turning to convince the world they

have delivered end-to-end FCoE. In

act, the products they’ve released

are largely inadequate. What’smore, they’ve never addressed the

burning question: Why bother with

an end-to-end strategy when FCoE

at the edge is more practical?

It’s important to frst note that

moving enterprise storage trafc

to Ethernet networks seems like a

match made in hell. The SCSI pro-

tocol requires delivery o packets

that are lossless and in order, but

Ethernet was designed or “best

eort” delivery. This won’t cut it

or storage, which is a high-volume

payload, swamping adapters and

switches with I/O.

But the lure o commodity-driven

pricing and order o magnitude

aster roadmap perormance is too

enticing to ignore, so the storage

networking industry has let it to the

engineers to fgure out how to make

Ethernet an appropriate transportmechanism or block storage.

Fitting the square peg o stor-

age into the round hole o Ethernet

required quite a bit o engineer-

ing: The FCoE rame ormat and

FCoE Initialization Protocol (FIP),

established in 2010 as FC-BB-5, laid

the groundwork, while data center

bridging (DCB) extensions brought

ow control and queue manage-

ment to transorm Ethernet into a

reliable transport mechanism.

This bulked up version o 10

Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) unctions

surprisingly well in practice, and

was quickly put into production at

why bother witheNd-to-eNd fCoe?aN edge strategyworks just fiNeIt takes way t mch engineering r end-t-end

FCE t wrk, and vendr prdcts are wellyinadeqate. by stepheN foskett




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine


the edges o existing Fibre Channel

SANs or blade server attachments.

This is the essence o “edge-only”

FCoE, and it delivers a one-twopunch o exibility and perormance

at a reasonable cost. Most large

IT shops are perectly happy using

Fibre Channel at the core and Ether-

net at the edge.

But network switching vendors

won’t be content until they con-

vert the whole SAN to Ethernet,

so they spent 2011 crowing about

end-to-end FCoE, even though

products that shipped are a mixed

bag o pre-standard and proprietary

technologies. Their Ethernet abric

approaches range rom unctional-

but-unky to standardish-but-

experimental to laughably-limited.

And implementation o FC-BB-5 is

decidedly spotty or most vendors.

Put simply, end-to-end FCoE is pre-mature.

Ultimately, end users will be hap-

pier deploying 8 Gb Fibre Channel

SANs with a mix o FC and FCoE

server connections. They can see

how shaky FCoE at the core is at the

present time, and they are perectly

happy holding o on that transition

or a ew more years. Why would

they risk their jobs, and the saety otheir data, or a brand-new protocol

with limited return on investment?

Perhaps this controversy is born

o a undamental misunderstanding

by the networking industry o the

nature o enterprise storage. “Stor-

age people” are cautious and risk-

averse. Adoption o new technolo-gies is slow because storage simply

must be reliable. FCoE proponents

should be pleased with their oot-

hold at the edge o the SAN rather

than pushing aggressively to the

core. n

Mst large IT shpsare perectly happysing Fibre Channel

at the cre andEthernet at the edge.



Whether you’re launching your agency into the cloud or shoring up your internal enterprise network, Nova Datacom has expert-L

engineers ready to help you meet your mission requirements. With industry leading expertise across a wide variety of vertical markets

across multiple vendors, we can provide unbiased designs and implementations.

Hand-in-hand with design capabilities, NDC’s implementation experience and expertise are dicult to match with any other comp

Discover today how NDC can bring a world-renowned engineering sta to your projects. www.novadatacom.com




hme

idea lab

are we finally

in the age f the

flat netwrk?

Srt f

Can enterpriSe

wireleSS lanS

replaCe wired

netwrkS?

nt quite

fCoe at the


are imminent

why bther with

end-t-end fCoe?

an edge Strategy

wrkS juSt fine

about the authors

Rivka Gewirtz Little is the

Senior Site Editor or Tech-

Target Networking Media.

Shamus McGillicuddy is the

News Director or TechTarget

Networking Media Group.

Craig J. Mathias is a Principal

with Farpoint Group, an advi-

sory and systems-integration

rm based in Ashland, MA, specializing

in wireless networking, mobile comput-

ing, and related technologies, products

and services.

Stuart Miniman is an analyst

and research lead or net-

working and virtualization

or The Wikibon Project.

Stephen Foskett is an active

participant in the world o

enterprise inormation tech-

nology, currently ocusing on enterprise

storage and cloud computing. He is

responsible or Gestalt IT, a community

o independent IT thought leaders, and

organizes the popular Tech Field Day

events.

Network Evolution Ezine s p

tta n ma.

ria Giz Lil

Senior Site Editor

@a.

Sams MGilli

d f ns a Fas

s@a.

kaa Gai

S maa e

a@a.

Lia k

d f o ds

@a.

ka Gig

ea d

@a.

for sales iNquiries, please coNtact:

tm cli

S d f Sas

@a.

617-431-9491



SPONSOR RESOURCES

See ad page 2

• Enterasys Announces Fabric Architecture Message: OneFabric

• Integrating Physical and Virtual Networking - Virtualized Server Connect to the Data

Center Fabric

• OneFabric

See ad page 5

• Security Best Practices for the Mobile Enterprise

• Security Considerations for Cloud-Ready Data Centers

• Security Services Gateways

See ad page 8

• Next Generation IPS and Reputation Service

• Building Cloud-Optimized Data Center Networks

http://www.bitpipe.com/resource/1321904641_496



http://www.onefabric.net/

http://searchsecurity.bitpipe.com/detail/RES/1314819766_860.html



http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_102546/item_473431/2011%20IT%20Harvest%20Next%20Generation%20IPS%20and%20Reputation%20Services%20Whitepaper.pdf

http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_102546/item_473431/Building%20Cloud-Optimized%20Data%20Center%20Networks.pdf

http://www.juniper.net/




http://www.onefabric.net/




http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_102546/item_473431/2011%20IT%20Harvest%20Next%20Generation%20IPS%20and%20Reputation%20Services%20Whitepaper.pdf


http://www.enterasys.com/

http://www.lilien.com/



SPONSOR RESOURCES

See ad page 31

See ad page 11

See ad page 22

• When “Good Enough” Is Not Good Enough

• Security Essentials for Mobile Devices: 10 Tips for Your Company Policy

• Ask Questions Until You Get the Right Answers and the Right Network


http://searchnetworking.bitpipe.com/detail/RES/1317920958_984.html






http://www.cisco.com/

http://www.novadatacom.com/

http://www.rim.com/



SPONSOR RESOURCES

See ad page

• HPM Networks

• HPM Smart

• Multi-Site Load Balancing and Disaster Recovery with Envoy

• A Case Study in Application Acceleration: SSL Offload & Web Compression

•Optimize Application Load Balancing Technology for Virtualized Infrastructures

• Managed Network Solutions

• Network Life Cycle Services





http://www.hpmnetworks.com/smart.php

http://www.coyotepoint.com/documents/whitepapers.php

http://www.coyotepoint.com/documents/casestudies.php


http://www.fujitsu.com/us/services/telecom/services-support/noc.html

http://www.fujitsu.com/us/services/telecom/services-support/


http://www.hpmnetworks.com/smart.php


http://www.coyotepoint.com/documents/casestudies.php


http://www.fujitsu.com/us/services/telecom/services-support/noc.html

http://www.fujitsu.com/us/services/telecom/services-support/

http://www.coyotepoint.com/

http://www.fujitsu.com/

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	bala-reddy
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Dec Network Evolution

Documents