Uncle Mike says “Virtualization hasn’t changed the fundamental laws of network architecture.”
Virtualization hasn’t changed the fundamental laws of network architecture
I am astounded by this statement. I violently disagree with this assertion.
Virtualization may have not changed the underlying mechanisms of CSMA/CD or provided the capability to exceed the speed of light, but virtualization has absolutely and fundamentally affected the manner in which networks are designed, deployed, managed and used. You know, network architecture.
Whether we’re talking about VLAN’s, MPLS, SOA, Grid Computing or Storage, almost every example of data center operations and network design today are profoundly impacted by the V-word.
Furthermore, virtualization (of transport, storage, application, policy, data) has also fundamentally changed the manner in which computing is employed and resources consumed. What you deploy, where, and how are really, really important.
More importantly (and relevant here) is that virtualization has caused architects to revisit the way in which these assets and the data that flow through them, is secured.
And to defray yet another "blah blah…big iron…large enterprise….blah blah" retort, I’m referring not just to the Crossbeam way (which is heavily virtualized,) but that of Cisco and Juniper also. All Next Generation Network Services are in a low-earth orbit of the mass that is virtualization.
"Virtualization of the routed core. Virtualization of the data and control planes. Virtualization of Transport. Extending the virtualized enterprise over the WAN. The virtualized access layer." You know what those are? Chapters out of a Cisco Press book on Network Virtualization which provides "…design guidance" for architects of virtualized Enterprises.
I suppose it’s only fair that I ask Mike to qualify his comment, because perhaps it’s another "out-of-context-ism" or I misunderstood (of course I did) but it made me itchy reading it.