This post feels like FUD. SDN is an extremely broad area the encompasses network virtualization and flow control. The post seems to focus on the challenges of flow control and doesn’t speak to the challenges of network virtualization and the solutions that are available. You can have network virtualization without flow control. Bakalov focuses on Openflow and the need to rip and replace existing infrastructure to support openflow. Most network virtualization solutions do not require new hardware to implement. I looked at this post with a curious eye seeing the author is the CTO of a network performance monitoring company.
The adoption of Software Defined Networking (SDN) may not have progressed as rapidly as some may have thought, with less than 10 percent of enterprises running significant production traffic through virtualized networks. While there’s no denying the business benefit of the technology, many hesitate to implement. What are the obstacles and how will the eventual move to SDN redefine the role of performance management applications for the enterprise and service providers?
What’s the holdup?
Many SDN architectures imply that a flat layer 3 network exists, which is historically not how people designed and built data centers. There isn’t an easy transition from your current data center to one that gets the most out of a software defined network.
What’s more, many organizations still need to depreciate their existing data centers down to almost nothing before they’re willing to go through a major forklift upgrade. There are some exceptions here –…
View original post 811 more words
Virtualized Geek 