SDN Myth? My take ...

As usual, I enjoy reading my friend Matthew Palmer's thought provoking blog quite a bit!  Matt listed 5 myths and here is my take:

1) In theory everyone should have a controller, yet it is a bit like saying HP/IBM/Dell etc server companies in theory need an OS too.  In practice, customers look for a controller that is not the single point of failure, not a single point of performance bottleneck, and providing additional/clear value than the status quo physical switch embedded stack.

2) At the end of the day, what matters is how the Open Source project is governed not just how it is licensed.  People are always willing to pay for value but what they don't want is a vendor lock-in scenario where the dominant player can literally name the price.

3) I agree to an extent, at least for the ones Matt and I often talked about. :)  I think we should set the expectation appropriately at the first place: network virtualization use case in particular is an exciting journey for both customers and vendors but we are at the very beginning of it as an industry.

4) The goal for a start-up is to have a solid product with indisputable value prop, VC should take care of cash flow issue for them, so positive or not should not be a concern at all for those who have a good product.  I don't know whether big companies want cash flow positive for their SDN P&L? Probably not either, it is too early.

5) I think the most important thing is we need to look at the big picture of why people are moving. Talent shift from one generation of hi-tech companies to another for technology transition.
Just like people left SGI/DEC for Google/VMware at the turn of the century, we are seeing people leaving from previously top engineering organization to the "next Google/VMware".  Big Switch Networks benefited tremendously from this talent migration shift given the networking industry needs a transformation desperately and many top engineers are hungry to make a big impact in this SDN journey.

New Networking Landscape on the Eve of VMworld 2012

Last year this time, I was at the tail end of a long break after my decade-long tenure at VMware and about to join Big Switch Networks to catch the next big wave.

Back one year ago, friends at Nicira were getting ready to compete with VMware for Hypevisor networking market head on and the team from Big Switch was building up a war chest to challenge Cisco's networking mainframe business.  One year later, Nicira was swallowed by VMware before a head-to-head competition has even started, big win for nicira shareholders.  Everyone is asking what about Big Switch Networks?

Before I share my perspective on the next big wave, it is worth looking at the current networking industry landscape:

1. VMware will showcase substantial partnership on VXLAN and the network extensibility framework (NetX).  They may show off a few OpenStack workflows from Nicira acquisition.  VMware is fighting two battles: a) combating the rising vendor lock-in image; b) forklifting an entire networking industry;
2. Cisco won't have too much to show other than they will show lots of love on VXLAN.  Cisco is fighting two battles too: a) slowed down growth due to SDN; b) loss of the first-hop control to hypervisor vSwitch.
3. For the rest, Microsoft, Citrix, Oracle will keep low profile for now but catch up behind the scene when it comes to virtual networking.  HP, Dell, Juniper, Arista, Brocade's world will join the VXLAN and NetX fireworks party big time, as an alignment with VMware brings short-term business benefits tremendously given VMware owns the default stack on the server side.

While SDN momentum is all time high, many customers are still scratching their heads on the tangible benefits and what's new after all? Aren't we seeing the same ol' Cisco and VMware's Closed SDN stack for a long time? VMware had an overlay network product before Nicira was incorporated and now there are two products doing the same thing; Cisco had a track record of pushing out boxes after boxes, and now there is another box on the horizon from a spin-in. 

Think about it:

• Isn't the physical network still at "human speed" and having a hard time to adapt to the server land's "machine speed" when it comes to day-to-day operation?

• Isn't the silo problem started by Cisco's creation of CCIE empire and then reinforced by VMware's creation of the VCP kingdom? 

In a nutshell, my simple perspective is customers have a huge pain point in networking today and someone needs to watch out for customers and score a big win for customers.

VMware Joined SDN Olympics

First off, congratulations to my long time friends at VMware and Nicira -- they certainly made the SDN space a lot more interesting and deserve some reward after delivering some key milestones.

Some asked if the price is too high -- the fact is this type of strategic deal is valued at the size of the dream not the size of the revenue, it is a good deal as long as the dream is both bold and real enough.  Given Nicira is quite comparable to Insieme (*), the valuation seems to be very reasonable.  It is the beginning of a vendor war of physical versus hypervisor switches and VMware just fired the first shot.

With this deal, customers wonder why neither Cisco nor VMware bridges the gap between network admins and server admins but instead they each encouraged more silos between the two camps (VMware is saying physical network is merely a dumb pipe and Cisco is selling the value of their physical boxes)?   At the end of the day, both companies have to match their products with their business model.

Despite the short-term constraints they have, they did earn a spot on the SDN bandwagon with the money spent, they validated the SDN space, and they both have said it is only the very beginning! :)

I'm excited about the SDN opportunity ahead!

-howie
(*) Here is my comp table, the opinion here does not necessarily represent my employer.

Moore's Law on VMware's stock price?

Congratulations to Paul Maritz and Pat Gelsinger for their new roles!

I got a bunch of emails wondering whether VMware's stock has peaked given the virtualization market is quite saturated.

There is no question VMware will need to find the next cash cow at some point, but the virtualization business journey is no where to close to a saturation point in my opinion.

I think VMware's revenue and stock price has the _potential_ to track the blue line in the Gartner chart below -- hey, Moore's Law in play? :)

The bottom line is that hyper growth for virtualization ain't over yet, but the challenge for VMware is other players especially Microsoft are not standing still in the market share battle!

SDN/OpenFlow will not replace today's network!

I have the conviction that SDN/OpenFlow will transform the networking industry just like what VMware hypervisor did for server industry, but I don't think it is going to replace today's network any time soon if one day at all.

First, let me quote a from a job candidate. 

He has subsequently accepted our offer but it is a real typical one: "Can a centralized openflow based model for running complete complex network control plane is fully scalable, practical, deployable, interoperable, etc. when compared to the current traditional way of establishing packet switched network which are highly distributed for the longest time."

The answer is, "Oh Hell No"!

Secondly, if replacing the existing infrastructure isn't what SDN/OpenFlow about, then where is the money for SDN/OpenFlow?

IMHO, the golden goose is about complementing existing infrastructure with unprecedented flexibility, agility, visibility, resource fungibility in a way that is multi-vendor, multi-skillset, and compatible with today's toolchains and workflow when needed.

For instance, in any data center, if you ask a server admin, "your life changed in the last 10 years?", the answer is obviously "Oh Yeah, instead of dealing with physical machines and physical racks, I'm mostly dealing with virtual machines with mouse clicks"; if you ask the same question to a network admin, the answer will be "Not at all, I'm still dealing with the same VLAN and ACL CLIs that I had 10 years ago, it works but I simply cannot keep up with the mouse clicks and all the fancy ideas from the server guys".

The fundamental issue here is the disparity between "machine speed" vs. "human speed", network admins are desperate about a technology that gives them the "machine speed" otherwise they are in the way of the business.

Lastly, are those golden goose use cases implementable without forklifting?

Absolutely possible at least.  In some cases, OpenFlow is  a feature of the switch but not a wholesale deal.  In other cases, OpenFlow is augmenting the networking, not replacing the network.


All in all, SDN/OpenFlow is about complementing not forklifting existing network infrastructure, it is just like VMware server virtualization technology complemented previous generation server infrastructure.

Is the new Cisco spin-in Insieme or Insiemi?

Insieme or Insiemi? I heard this question quite a bit recently and have not checked with my friends there but according to my business partner at Big Switch Networks, the real name is Insieme Business Unit (IBU).

Cisco can of course name it however it wants for now but the reality is that it is an off the balance sheet business unit that sooner or later will be folded back in.  This BU is working on things harder for other BUs to execute with their "normal" constraints.  This ain't bad news for Cisco although it hurts morale for the current employees loyal to the Cisco mothership.

Like any business in silicon valley, the key to success is the people.  In order to compete with tier-1 start-ups on talents, they must call themselves a start-up not the "IBU".  At the end of the day, for talents who want big company insurance yet can tolerate capped/limited financial upside, corporate decoder ring, top-down engineering culture, and top heavy management, it is one of the better BUs to work for.  Great news for people looking for a stable and good paying job!

Cisco's joining the SDN battleground is like Microsoft's going after the server virtualization battleground 7-8 years ago, which not only validated the new emerging industry immediately but also did the customer a big favor by having another player in the market.  Customer will win as a result!

I wish IBU good luck and I also wish the industry take this unique opportunity in thinking through how to leverage the tremendous momentum and deliver unprecedented customer benefits.

Happy Year of Dragon!

To me, 2011 was a "big switch" year and I'm anticipating 2012 is a bigger year for network virtualization:

   http://www.virtual-strategy.com/2012/01/11/2012-prediction-big-switch-networks

Happy new year to everyone!

-howie