On the Future of Networks and Moving Data Centers

As Cisco (CSCO), HP (HPQ), Juniper (JNPR), F5 (FFIV), Amazon (AMZN), Microsoft (MSFT), Google (GOOG) and others circle the data center field of battle, one strategic ridge of high ground is in network automation, or the ability to move (or adjust/provision) IT assets at the push of a button without the need for extensive manual intervention. That manual intervention accounts for a sizable portion of the costs, risks and compromises of today’s static networks.

Several of these companies have already made notable announcements in 2009, yet none have yet let the virtualization genie out of the VLAN bottle completely. When they do, watch out for a new wave of IT innovation.

Last week I listened to four experts talk about Virtualization and the Future of the Network. After Nemertes’ co-founder Andreas Antonopoulos shared recent findings on the shift in virtualization drivers (from capex savings to flexibility), VMware’s (VMW) Mark Thiele shared his perspective on how far flexibility could go and the potentially powerful economics of an evolved network.

Thiele’s Vision

Instead of isolated data centers around the world Thiele illustrated a dynamic and resilient mesh of processing power capable of quickly adjusting to developments as they occur. That mesh could avoid disasters by simply shifting its applications and processing cycles from one location to another in real time. It could also shift for other reasons, including localized cost increases or brownouts or a sudden change in a cloud providers terms of service or service level agreement.

Thiele makes his point on slide 13 as a hypothetical tsunami prepares to strike the Southern California coastline, applications and servers move in advance of its wake to optimized locations:

Imagine the sheer amount of resources (people, time, expense, etc.) that it would take with today’s static network infrastructure to move servers from one side of a continent to another or even to change cloud providers. Then add a little risk, a few angry users and a mountain of tasks and procedures to ensure that networks stay secure and available.

That’s why infrastructure 2.0 is Virtualization's Golden Spike; it enables a new level of scale, find ability and flexibility driven by powerful economics.

Thiele has shown that the evolution of IT may very well depend on the evolution of the network. Those players with the experience and technology to deliver on the promise are likely to win, despite offshore competition from low end players or category crossers convinced that the tired “speeds and feeds” mantra will carry them into new markets.

The development of dynamic linkages between physical and virtual infrastructure will unleash incredible innovation and automation. The outcome is inevitable; it makes too much sense:

Disaster avoidance is one of several infrastructure 2.0 payoff scenarios, which include: 1) VMotion between data centers (for avoidance, recovery, economy, regulatory developments, etc); 2) changing cloud providers to adjust to short term service/price adjustments; 3) IT integration from M&A; 4) using disaster recovery assets to provide incremental capacity; and 5) implementing real disaster recovery in smaller data center environments.

The first network vendor to deliver on this promise gains a significant advantage: the ability to sell gear that dramatically shrinks IT opex and enables massive flexibility and scale for a fraction of the upfront expense. This vision is the equivalent of supply chain for IT and represents a new era of computing potentials enabled by an even more strategic network.

If you’re still scratching your head wondering how a case can be made for additional investments in network gear and innovation in a tough economic environment, check out one of Thiele’s other slides on data center costs. He shows how two Tier 2 data centers empowered by infrastructure 2.0 can be build for less than half the cost of a single “Fort Knox” type data center.

Yes, the network is back again thanks to the potentials of virtualization and the new steam locomotive of IT, the portable virtual machine. Market caps of the networking players are bound to fluctuate as one or another reaches higher ground and competitors face increasingly uphill battles.

While some network vendors may see problems with virtualization, those who see the opportunity and can gain the high ground might experience a new era of growth.

Mark Thiele has articulated the payoff from his vantage point of running data centers for a living… for the leader in virtualization. He is also a founder of www.datacenterpulse.org.

Comments

[Michael Eis...:]

The bigger issue is the cost of power in California.

Sep 29 08:24 AM

[Gregory Ness:]

Michael:

Good point. There are longer term fixed factors as well. Those factors would drive your initial selectoion of sites. Then there are short term fluctuations/changes that would drive movement. The fatsre you can react the better you perform over longer periods.

Thanks
Greg

Sep 29 11:02 AM

[user1010101:]

Greg:

I was curious if you had any insight into the use of SSD's in the data center - your insight into their application.

Thanks,

Ryan

Sep 29 01:24 PM

[Gregory Ness:]

User:

Thanks for the question. I didn't know the answer so I forwarded it to Mark Thiele wo did. Here is his answer:

"If we look at available disk technology today we'll see that spinning disk is reaching a plateau of capability. Size is great, but performance can't keep up. The impact of this trend in disk is that we will have enormous capacity, but potentially reduced performance with higher overhead. While in the SSD market the technology is still fairly new, and we can expect to see continued rapid improvements in size, performance and cost. I believe we can expect to see the application of Moore's Law to this new branch of technology in the storage family of products. Lastly SSD is generally more efficient from a power perspective, so we can expect to see a strong drive in this direction going forward."

Thanks!
Greg

Sep 29 03:03 PM

[user1010101:]

Not to be rude to Mark, but that was a very generic response that many are claiming. The SSD technology is already being used in the first Teir IBM and EMC storage arrays. I was curious if people are actually seeing the performance that is expected out of these devices and if the extra $$$ are worth it.

Do you know anyone that what have direct insight into the use of SSD technology in 2009/2010 storage arrays?

Thanks for the fast response!


On Sep 29 03:03 PM Gregory Ness wrote:

> User:
>
> Thanks for the question. I didn't know the answer so I forwarded
> it to Mark Thiele wo did. Here is his answer:
>
> "If we look at available disk technology today we'll see that spinning
> disk is reaching a plateau of capability. Size is great, but performance
> can't keep up. The impact of this trend in disk is that we will have
> enormous capacity, but potentially reduced performance with higher
> overhead. While in the SSD market the technology is still fairly
> new, and we can expect to see continued rapid improvements in size,
> performance and cost. I believe we can expect to see the application
> of Moore's Law to this new branch of technology in the storage family
> of products. Lastly SSD is generally more efficient from a power
> perspective, so we can expect to see a strong drive in this direction
> going forward."
>
> Thanks!
> Greg

Sep 29 03:56 PM

[mthiele:]

Ryan,

You're absolutely correct, it was a generic answer and don't worry you're not rude.

So, I'll attempt to take up the challenge and offer something meaningful.

As much as I like SSD there are several things that will keep it out of mainstream for the next 3-5 years.
- Price per GB (while they don't have to be as cheap as regular disk they have to be a lot closer. Currently they are about 4X.
- SSDs tend to deteriorate and lose cells, like other flash media. So for traditional environments this would be an unacceptable overhead.
- Best option is for high volume environments where maintaining the data isn't the issue, but rather speed is the benefit.
- I believe that SSD has a place in most storage environments, but you should be careful about defining the hierarchy.
- Lastly, I hope they continue to make progress on MTBF and on price, because I really like the potential for power savings. However, right now power savings won't be the driver for a purchase.

Regards,
Mark


On Sep 29 01:24 PM user1010101 wrote:

> Greg:
>
> I was curious if you had any insight into the use of SSD's in the
> data center - your insight into their application.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan

Sep 29 08:12 PM

[user1010101:]

Thanks Mark, that was helpful.

My understanding of the SSD argument is that $/IOPS is very favorable and the in Tier0 of the array, this is more important than $/Gb. I agree with you that you wont see SSD technology replacing SATA drivers in the 3rd Teir of a storage array but I do believe areas that require high IOPS will need to move to SSD technology.
My logic is that you can't simply run RAID 0 devices and short stroke 15,000 rmp drives any longer. This technology simply doesn't keep up with demand. Given that an SSD can replace multiple HDD's in this part of the array, I believe that we will see further enhancements to EMC's "FAST" (fully automated storage tiering) software.

The drives that are used in these arrays are not your typical MLC NAND memory but instead the SLC (more expensive) NAND. I know intel and I believe micron are close to coming out with a SSD that is 3bits per cell (MLC is 2 bits and SLC is 1) that will drive down cost even further.

Ryan


On Sep 29 08:12 PM mthiele wrote:

> Ryan,
>
> You're absolutely correct, it was a generic answer and don't worry
> you're not rude.
>
> So, I'll attempt to take up the challenge and offer something meaningful.
>
>
> As much as I like SSD there are several things that will keep it
> out of mainstream for the next 3-5 years.
> - Price per GB (while they don't have to be as cheap as regular disk
> they have to be a lot closer. Currently they are about 4X.
> - SSDs tend to deteriorate and lose cells, like other flash media.
> So for traditional environments this would be an unacceptable overhead.
>
> - Best option is for high volume environments where maintaining the
> data isn't the issue, but rather speed is the benefit.
> - I believe that SSD has a place in most storage environments, but
> you should be careful about defining the hierarchy.
> - Lastly, I hope they continue to make progress on MTBF and on price,
> because I really like the potential for power savings. However, right
> now power savings won't be the driver for a purchase.
>
> Regards,
> Mark

Sep 30 12:48 PM

[user1010101:]

By the way Mark - Your datacenterpulse website is great - love the information you make available here. Thankyou for opening that up to those interested in learning/keep up to date with data center technology!

Sep 30 01:02 PM

[Gregory Ness:]

Thanks Ryan and Mark!

G

Oct 01 12:11 PM