Bladewatch.com

I got a fact sheet from Cisco talking about Fibre Channel over Ethernet which has been in the news recently relating to new standards being submitted for approval. The fact sheet was very cool, it highlights some interesting benefit and cost illustrations over a traditional setup. The cost improvements and energy efficiency savings are impressive according to the document. As with any statement about costs and efficiency they can be debated, so if we abstract ourselves from values costs and talk about converging storage and network through the same connection, we can establish whether it’s going to be the next big thing or if it’s still some time for the future.

We’ve seen a lot in the last few years with 10GB Ethernet, originally I remember colleagues saying “you’ll never need 10GB…”, only to find them talking about it being very useful as the backbone platform for their virtualization or hpc solutions, and at the moment I think Fibre Channel over Ethernet is at a similar stage. The current comments being about “we’ve invested in fibre…”, or “we’re not upgrading our switches or converging storage and networks, it’s too expensive…”.

That’s right, at the moment their existing network and SAN infrastructure is in place, the patching is there, everyone understands their place in the infrastructure world. But long term, Ethernet is fairly understood as a medium for communication in the workplace, taking it therefore to the ‘next generation’ of supplying the storage and the network down the same converged pipe isn’t necessarily world ending, and could easily be an extension of the platform like 1GB over the 100MB which has been standard for years, and still is in many an enterprise.

Let us not get negative on an idea, on a concept of new technology, let us see what it can bring, let more companies onboard new products, solutions and innovations around Fibre Channel over Ethernet, continue working on standards, drive down the costs, improve our ability to manage the infrastructure and realize Fibre Channel over Ethernet as a business or communication enabler, rather than that difficult word or concept, change.

In essence, we’re de-duplicating workloads, roles you might say but not people.  The current process for a server build might be:

1. Allocate server host name
2. Allocate IP address and network port
3. Patching supply patch cable
4. Allocate storage ports
5. Data patching supply patch cables
6. Operating system team install operating system
7. Storage to zone in the cards to storage

If we can change this to: (where networks can allocate ports, and the patching team can add another cable(s) where necessary)

1. Allocate server host name
2. Allocate IP address, network ports and storage ports
3. Patching supply patch cables
4. Operating system team install the operating system
5. Storage present the storage

Remember from an end user point of view, the fewer teams involved, the fewer steps on the call to get my server installed, the less time it takes for the server to be delivered.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.