Home > Cisco, Jackassery, Unified Threat Management (UTM) > No DNS Disclosure Debacle Here: Stiennon Pens the Funniest Thing I’ve Read in 2008…

No DNS Disclosure Debacle Here: Stiennon Pens the Funniest Thing I’ve Read in 2008…

Clownnose
Hat tip to Rothman for this.

I don’t know if Stiennon is off his meds or simply needed to re-post something from 2001 to meet an editorial quota, but his Network World article titled "The Most Important Networking Trend of 2008" ties thus far with the "Evolution of Dance" as my vote for most entertaining Internet content.

Richard’s epiphany goes something like this:

  • Multifunction network devices that have the ability to "route" traffic and combine security capabilities are the ‘next big thing’

  • If a company offers a multifunction network device that has the ability to "route" traffic and combine security capabilities but have the misfortune of using Linux as the operating system, they will "…forever be pigeon-holed as SMB solutions, not ready for enterprise
    prime time."

  • The Wall Street Journal issued "… the year’s most important article on networking" in an article titled "New Routers Catch the Eyes of IT Departments" which validates the heretofore undiscovered trend of convergence and commoditization!
     
  • "Real" network security players such as Cisco, Juniper and Redback are building solutions to this incredible new trend and because of the badge on the box, will be considered ready for "…enterprise prime time."
     
  • The WSJ article talks about the Cisco ASR1000 router as the penultimate representation of this new breed of converged "network security" device.
     
  • Strangely, Stiennon seems to have missed the fact that the operating system (IOS-XE) that the ASR1000 is based on is, um, Linux.  You know, that operating system that dictates that this poor product will "…forever be pigeon-holed as SMB solutions, not ready for enterprise
    prime time."

Oh, crap!  Somebody better tell Cisco!

So despite the fact that Cisco ASR1000 is positioned as an edge device as are these crazy solutions called UTM devices, it seems we’re all missing something because somehow a converged edge device now counts as being able to provide a "secure network fabric?"

In closing, allow me to highlight the cherry on top of Stiennon’s security sundae:   

Have you ever noticed how industry "experts" tend to get stuck in
a rut and continue to see everything through the same lens despite
major shifts in markets and technology?

Yes, Richard, I do believe I have noticed this…

Funny stuff!

/Hoff

  1. July 22nd, 2008 at 17:18 | #1

    LMAO… woowwww….

  2. July 22nd, 2008 at 18:41 | #2

    Sheesh. You and Rothman must just have gotten off the same cruise boat. In your hung over state you say "Hey Stiennon wrote something! Let's jump all over that. You hit him low and I'll throw my Margarita is his face."
    While it is not news to you Mr. Multi-function Blade Box Beaker you may have noticed that this stuff *is* news to the main stream. As you know most industry analysts still proclaim best of breed as the right way to go. See my comments on Rothman's blog for more. How is it that the WSJ can scoop the trade press on something that is so obvious? *That* is what I was driving at and giving them credit for.

  3. July 22nd, 2008 at 19:32 | #3

    This isn't news unless you add the word "old" onto the front of it. The article you wrote was not focused on innovation, it was hyperbole.
    The reason Rothman and I jumped on your post, is that it simply paints a picture that doesn't reflect reality.
    Been going on for years. Need a better example, how about security, WAN optimization, proxy, routing and application delivery platforms (ala f5, Bluecoat, Citrix…) same story, different acronym.
    It's funny that your pushing the "secure fabric" story when what you're referring to is the edge. Stretch it as much as you want, but the edge does not a "fabric" make.
    Now, you start taking about the CSR or Nexus, then this starts making more sense, but you left out all the chewy bits to knit that story properly.
    The WSJ didn't scoop anybody on anything. This is merely the UTM story being adopted by mainstream players now that functions are mature and are commoditizing. You call it a scoop because the WSJ is talking about cost savings by combining features?
    This is simply the effective selling of roadmapped products. They didn't just pop out of the sky!
    You can call it what you want.
    Consolidation and convergence. Pure and simple.
    /Hoff

  4. July 22nd, 2008 at 19:53 | #4

    Sublime!
    But seriously, he got one thing right: If the "enterprise vendors" put their logo on a box, regardless of the OS it's running, it's "enterprise ready". No one was ever fired for buying _________.
    — Arik

  5. Chris
    July 23rd, 2008 at 08:18 | #5

    Why penultimate and not ultimate? Is there another shoe waiting to drop?

  6. david.oberry
    July 23rd, 2008 at 22:25 | #6

    Seriously, between things like this and the Network World "conversation" he had with Joel, I am seriously stumped as to wth is going on lately. It is like Digital GroundHog Day…
    Side note:
    The one good thing that came out of one of these wars was me stumbling on this blog so all in all maybe he is entitled to some addled musings.
    Back on topic:
    The real problem I have with this type of thing is for just a brief second my brain goes into a bit of panic as I think…
    Wait..maybe I am missing something…so I comb through it again…read more…listen to the YouTube stuff and think…
    Damn what a waste of 20 minutes…
    Richard…
    1.) You gotta provide some value somewhere man and soon because lately I just do not get you at all.
    2.) Never forget that the Iraqi Minister of Information was respected early on as well.
    3.) I am not one to pile on and I surely do not agree with the various people that you seem to be at war with on everything and that should tell you something because we do seem to agree on one thing right now…
    4.) If I create a law and name it after myself does that guarantee me "relevance" no matter how crazy I seem?
    I actually kinda felt sorry for Joel once I read that transcript because that dude is on it and deserves some worthy debate.
    David

  1. No trackbacks yet.