[This article was written by Mat Mathews.]
Ethan Banks (@ecbanks) initiated an interesting Twitter conversation last weekend by claiming that the constant “technique churn” within organizations that utilize SDN and NetOps is doing the networking industry a disservice. Banks feels that ever-changing frameworks make it nearly impossible to thoroughly understand new technologies. Our own Mike Bushong (@mbushong) took a deep dive into the subject on the Plexxi blog this week in response to those claims. Be sure to check it out before you head out for the day.
In this week’s PlexxiTube video of the week, Dan Backman explains how Plexxi’s Big Data fabric solution can run both L2 and L3 simultaneously.
In an article this week for SDN Central, Craig Matsumoto looks at users that are growing increasingly tired of vendor lock-in and therefore turn to white box switching to provide additional interoperability. In my opinion, the interoperability provided is interesting as it is not a property of vendor intentions. When we accelerate the pace of innovation, there are going to be new capabilities that get added to gear. At the time of first-add, no one else supports the feature. At that moment, and until others match their roadmaps to the new feature, you lose interoperability. If that feature is important to you, you are locked in. There are certainly egregious actions taken by vendors in the past that force lock in. Deploying snowflake – or unique – environments is likely the biggest cause of lock-in. So, do we all move at the pace of the slowest research and development budget? Or, do we allow there to be a little feature drift and rely on customers to self-regulate some? It has to be the latter. The question is always whether the new feature is worth the new headaches: Is the juice worth the squeeze?