On choosing pra genova VMware NSX or Cisco ACI : BRAD HEDLUND
Are you stuck in the middle of a battle to choose VMware NSX or Cisco ACI? In this post I ll attempt to bring some clarity and strategic guidance in first choosing the right path, then propose pra genova how the two technologies can co-exist. I’ll pra genova start with the message below from a reader asking for my opinion on the matter:
I’m involved in a new Data Center networking project where Cisco is proposing the Cisco ACI solution. pra genova I am starting to dig-in to the technology, but my immediate gut reaction is to use Cisco for a standard Clos-type Leaf and Spine switch network and use NSX for providing Layer 3 to Layer 7 services.
As you can imagine, this is a highly political discussion and our network pra genova team are Cisco-centric and resisting my ideas. We are a VMware/Cisco shop and I want the best fit for our SDDC strategy.”
For the sake of discussion, pra genova let s assume that your IT organization wants to optimize for better efficiency across all areas, and embark pra genova on a journey to the promised land . More specifically, you want to obtain template driven self-service automation for application delivery, as well as configuration automation for the physical switches and servers. Let s also assume that you would like to preserve the familiar model of buying your hardware from Cisco, and your software from VMware. E.g. We are a VMware/Cisco shop .
Before I begin, it should be obvious that I’ll approach this with a bias for VMware NSX ; the result of a thoughtful decision I made two years ago to join the VMware NSX team instead of the other hardware switch vendor opportunities available at the time. The choice was easy for the simple reason that VMware is the most capable pure software company in the networking business. It was apparent to me then (and still is now), that in the new world of hybrid cloud and self-service IT, the winners will be the ones who can produce the best software . Choosing a path forward rooted in software
Any way you slice it, your virtual machines will be connected to a software virtual switch. This is the domain of a fluid virtual environment that will exist whether or not you decide to use VMware NSX, or go all-in with Cisco ACI. Either direction will require that you do something special with the software virtual switch before you can proceed down the chosen path to the promised land. This isn t opinion or theory, it s a universally accepted fact. If the solution isn t able to gain programmatic control of the fluid network within the software-centric virtual environment, it s a total non-starter like buying a fancy television without a remote control. It s not optional or even a matter that s up for discussion. Everybody agrees this is a necessary function. Well then, what does that tell us?
To explore that thought pra genova a bit further, let s consider the hardware-centric point of view. Any way you slice it, your hypervisors and non-virtual machines will be connected pra genova to a hardware physical switch. This is the domain of a static environment that will exist whether or not you decide to use VMware NSX or Cisco ACI. One of the two directions requires that you also do something special with hardware switches pra genova before you can even proceed pra genova with the (above) unanimous requirement for special software virtual switches (e.g. Cisco s software virtual switch for ACI doesn t even function without special hardware switches). pra genova However, nothing special needs to be done with hardware in the NSX direction. You re already well down the path of VMware NSX when (above) you did something special with software virtual switches.
I can proceed to argue that nothing special with hardware will ever need to be done. The moment you gained programmatic control over the fluid software environment you ve done everything necessary, and then pose the question; Why do you need programmatic control pra genova over this static non-virtual pra genova environment anyway? The point here is not to have the debate, but that the debate is there to be had. This is still a matter of opinion and theory. Suppose you bought an adjustable pra genova TV stand to go with that fancy new television; does it need a remote control too?
For the sake of argument, let s presume you accept the theory that there needs to be some programmatic control pra genova over the static environment. Hey, it sounds nice, so why not? Maybe you do want a remote pra genova control to adjust your TV stand, just in case . For the Cisco ACI path to make sense, the next argument you need to make is that the fancy television should only function when it s placed on an adjustable TV stand; and only if the TV stand can be adjusted by the same remote control that operates the television. And finally, you ll need to convince people that your fancy television and adjustable stand must be designed by the same company — one that specializes in building television stands. Otherwise, they d better wait and stick with the same old w
Are you stuck in the middle of a battle to choose VMware NSX or Cisco ACI? In this post I ll attempt to bring some clarity and strategic guidance in first choosing the right path, then propose pra genova how the two technologies can co-exist. I’ll pra genova start with the message below from a reader asking for my opinion on the matter:
I’m involved in a new Data Center networking project where Cisco is proposing the Cisco ACI solution. pra genova I am starting to dig-in to the technology, but my immediate gut reaction is to use Cisco for a standard Clos-type Leaf and Spine switch network and use NSX for providing Layer 3 to Layer 7 services.
As you can imagine, this is a highly political discussion and our network pra genova team are Cisco-centric and resisting my ideas. We are a VMware/Cisco shop and I want the best fit for our SDDC strategy.”
For the sake of discussion, pra genova let s assume that your IT organization wants to optimize for better efficiency across all areas, and embark pra genova on a journey to the promised land . More specifically, you want to obtain template driven self-service automation for application delivery, as well as configuration automation for the physical switches and servers. Let s also assume that you would like to preserve the familiar model of buying your hardware from Cisco, and your software from VMware. E.g. We are a VMware/Cisco shop .
Before I begin, it should be obvious that I’ll approach this with a bias for VMware NSX ; the result of a thoughtful decision I made two years ago to join the VMware NSX team instead of the other hardware switch vendor opportunities available at the time. The choice was easy for the simple reason that VMware is the most capable pure software company in the networking business. It was apparent to me then (and still is now), that in the new world of hybrid cloud and self-service IT, the winners will be the ones who can produce the best software . Choosing a path forward rooted in software
Any way you slice it, your virtual machines will be connected to a software virtual switch. This is the domain of a fluid virtual environment that will exist whether or not you decide to use VMware NSX, or go all-in with Cisco ACI. Either direction will require that you do something special with the software virtual switch before you can proceed down the chosen path to the promised land. This isn t opinion or theory, it s a universally accepted fact. If the solution isn t able to gain programmatic control of the fluid network within the software-centric virtual environment, it s a total non-starter like buying a fancy television without a remote control. It s not optional or even a matter that s up for discussion. Everybody agrees this is a necessary function. Well then, what does that tell us?
To explore that thought pra genova a bit further, let s consider the hardware-centric point of view. Any way you slice it, your hypervisors and non-virtual machines will be connected pra genova to a hardware physical switch. This is the domain of a static environment that will exist whether or not you decide to use VMware NSX or Cisco ACI. One of the two directions requires that you also do something special with hardware switches pra genova before you can even proceed pra genova with the (above) unanimous requirement for special software virtual switches (e.g. Cisco s software virtual switch for ACI doesn t even function without special hardware switches). pra genova However, nothing special needs to be done with hardware in the NSX direction. You re already well down the path of VMware NSX when (above) you did something special with software virtual switches.
I can proceed to argue that nothing special with hardware will ever need to be done. The moment you gained programmatic control over the fluid software environment you ve done everything necessary, and then pose the question; Why do you need programmatic control pra genova over this static non-virtual pra genova environment anyway? The point here is not to have the debate, but that the debate is there to be had. This is still a matter of opinion and theory. Suppose you bought an adjustable pra genova TV stand to go with that fancy new television; does it need a remote control too?
For the sake of argument, let s presume you accept the theory that there needs to be some programmatic control pra genova over the static environment. Hey, it sounds nice, so why not? Maybe you do want a remote pra genova control to adjust your TV stand, just in case . For the Cisco ACI path to make sense, the next argument you need to make is that the fancy television should only function when it s placed on an adjustable TV stand; and only if the TV stand can be adjusted by the same remote control that operates the television. And finally, you ll need to convince people that your fancy television and adjustable stand must be designed by the same company — one that specializes in building television stands. Otherwise, they d better wait and stick with the same old w
No comments:
Post a Comment