Conversation Heating Up Over At F5 Blog On Infrastructure 2.0
I’ve been following the blogs over at F5 (note: I think that they have the formula right on social media). This post is rising in their conversation space - discussion on Infrastructure 2.0 in response to Greg Ness’ post original post on Infrastructure 2.0 (which I posted here on Broadband Developments).
Here is the post over that F5 written by Lori MacVittie. Kudos to F5 for creating deep conversations around contextually relevant content.
The comments are worth reading through - it’s a real conversation and relief to see deeper discussions verses the generalist blog conversations out there.
Here are my favorite snips
On the dynamic front, when you combine an intelligent application delivery controller with the ability to be orchestrated from within applications or within the OS, you get the ability to dynamically modify configuration of application delivery in real-time based on current conditions within the data center. And if you’re monitoring is intelligent enough, you can sense within seconds when an application - whether virtualized or not - has disappeared or conversely, when it’s come back on line. F5 has been supporting this kind of dynamic, flexible application infrastructure for years. It’s not really new except that its importance has suddenly skyrocketed due to exactly the scenario Greg points out using virtualization.
Even if it was, some infrastructure is already prepared to deal with that dynamism. Dynamism is just another term for agility and makes the case well for loose-coupling of security and delivery with the applications living in the infrastructure. If we just apply the lessons we’ve learned from SOA to virtualization and cloud computing and 90% of the “Big Hairy Questions” can be answered by existing technology. We just may have to change our architectures a bit to adapt to these new computing models.
Network infrastructure, specifically application delivery, has had to deal with applications coming online and going offline since their inception. It’s the nature of applications to have outages, and application delivery infrastructure, at least, already deals with those situations. It’s merely the frequency of those “outages” that is increasing, not the general concept.
But what if they change IP addresses? That would indeed make things more complex. This requires even more intelligence but again, we’ve got that covered. While the functionality necessary to handle this kind of a scenario is not “out of the box” (yet) it is certainly not that difficult to implement if the infrastructure vendor provides the right kind of integration capability. Which most do already.
John:
Great points. I think a key issue will be dynamic reachability. Cloud and virtualization enable movement and change as a core business case. That’s a tough cookie for static infratstructure. One interesting standard on the forefront (to Lori’s point) is IF-MAP: http://www.infoblox.com/solutions/if-map.cfm
G
Comment by Greg Ness — October 22, 2008 @ 1:47 pm
Greg: I find the discussion fascinating over at F5 because for a corporate forum the conversation is very deep but not just F5 propaganda. I will be subscribing to them and reviewing their stuff.
The problem in the blogosphere is it’s stacked with too many generalists and the real conversations either don’t get started and completed OR if they do the ability to share them is hard.
Here at BroadDev I will look to pick out those ‘rising’ credible conversations and highlight them to give them more legs.
Thanks for commenting
Comment by John Furrier — October 22, 2008 @ 4:12 pm